'.Jf. 
9 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 
THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 
LOS  ANGELES 


Mindful  of  the  difficulties  constantly  encountered 
in  ascertaining  quickly  and  accurately  the  salient 
facts  which,  like  milestones,  have,  in  the  past,  marked 
the  continuous  development  and  progress  of  our  state 
as  the  leader  of  the  governments  of  the  world  in 
striving  to  achieve  the  highest  political  ideals  consis- 
tent with  the  protection  oj  the  fundamental  rights  of 
the  individual;  and  realizing  that  we  must  have  these 
facts  at  our  command  if  we  are  to  successfully  deal 
with  the  problems  of  the  present  and  future;  to  those 
with  whom  I  have  been  associated  for  many  years 
in  this  common  cause  in  public  l]fe  this  work  is 
dedicated. 


Autograph 

Limited  Edition 

of  which  this  is 

Number 


V  YORK 

•OVERNMENTAL 


<s.^Y  B.  SMITH 
GEORGE  CLINTON 

George  Clinton,  1st  and  3rd  governor  (1777-1795;  1801-1804) 
and  vice-president  of  the  United  States;  born  in  Little  Britain, 
Ulster  county,  N.  Y.,  July  26,  1739;  lawyer,  clerk  of  court 
of  common  pleas,  New  York  City;  member  of  state  assembly, 
1768;  elected  governor,  June  1777;  at  close  of  eight  successive 
terms  retired  from  public  life  until  1801,  when  again  elected; 
served  until  1804,  when  elected  vice-president,  dying  in  office 
April  20,  1812,  in  the  City  of  Washington,  D.  C. 


.VT.'J 


HISTORY 

OF  THE 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 
POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

EDITED  BY 
RAY  B.  SMITH 


VOLUME  I 

1776  -  1822 

BY 

WILLIS  FLETCHER  JOHNSON 


THE  SYRACUSE  PRESS.  INC. 

SYRACUSE.  N.Y. 

1922 


COPYRIGHTED 

THB  SYRACUSE  PRESS,  INC. 

1922 


v.\ 

CONTENTS  OF  VOLUME  I 
CHAPTER  I 

COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS 

Natural   advantages 17 

Characteristics  of  the  people 19 

Beginning  of  real  political  organization,  1683 21 

Inter-Colonial   convention   at   Albany,    1754 22 

Rise  of  opposition  to  British  misgovernment 24 

The  Stamp  act 26 

Sons  of  Liberty;  battle  of  Golden  Hill 29 

The  Tea  ships 30 

Non-importation    32 

The  last  Colonial  Assembly  under  the  Crown 35 

Preliminaries  to  Independence 36 

The  Declaration 38 

Founding  the  State 39 

CHAPTER  II,  1776-1777 

ORGANIZING  THE  STATE 

New  York  City  the  theater  of  war 41 

Battle  of  Long  Island 42 

Perambulations  of  the  State  government 43 

Making   of   the   Constitution 44 

Jay  and  his  work 46 

General  provisions  of  the  Constitution 48 

Restriction  of  the  franchise 49 

Administrative    functions 50 

The  judiciary 52 

Report  of  the  Constitution  to  the  Convention 53 

Failure  of  the  Anti-slavery  amendment 54 

The  Constitution  adopted  and  promulgated 55 

CHAPTER  III,  1777-1781 

THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR 

George    Clinton    58 

Candidates  for  the  Governorship 57 

Clinton's   election    60 

Inauguration    at   Kingston 61 

The    First    Legislature 62 

Ceremonies  and   amenities 63 

The  fall  of  the  Highlands  forts 64 

Further    perambulations 65 

Ratification  of  the  Articles  of  Confederation 67 

Early  legislative  acts 68 


'i   '-^ 
'     O 


Second    session   of   the   Legislature 69 

Vermont's   insurgency 70 

Third  session 72 

The   Fourth  Legislature 73 

Clinton    reelected....; 75 

CHAPTER  IV,  1781-1788 

FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE 

The  Fifth  Legislature 76 

Controversies   77 

The    Sixth    Legislature 78 

Alexander  Hamilton's  resolutions  of   1782 80 

Peace  with  Great  Britain 82 

Clinton's  third  election;   the  Seventh  Legislature 83 

The   Eighth  Legislature 85 

The   Ninth  Legislature 87 

Fourth  election  of  Clinton;   the  Tenth  Legislature 89 

The  Eleventh   Legislature 90 

CHAPTER  V,  1778-1788 

THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES 

Patriots   and    loyalists 91 

Governor  Clinton's  hostility  to  the  tories 92 

The    exodus 93 

Imposition   of  disqualifications 94 

State  Rights  vs.  National   Sovereignty 95 

The   question  of   the   revenues 96 

Clinton's  great  contest  with  Congress 97 

Hamilton's    attitude 99 

The  Annapolis  convention 102 

Election  of  Delegates  to  Philadelphia 103 

The  National  Constitutional  convention  of  1787 104 

The  Poughkeepsie  convention 106 

Clinton's    discomfiture 108 

CHAPTER  VI,  1788-1792 

UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION 

The  Twelfth  Legislature 109 

Federalists   and   Anti-Federalists Ill 

Clinton  elected  Governor  for  the  fifth  time 113 

Hamilton   and  Jay  in  the  National  government 114 

The   Thirteenth    Legislature 115 

The  first  United  States  Senators 116 

Aaron   Burr  117 

Philip  Schuyler's  two  offices 119 

John  Lansing  121 

The  Fourteenth  Legislature 122 

The    Livingstons 123 


Burr  becomes  Senator 125 

The  Fifteenth  and   Sixteenth  Legislatures 126,  127 

CHAPTER  VII,  1792-1795 

CLINTON  AND  JAY 

Governor  Clinton  seeks  a  sixth  election 128 

The  Federalists  nominate  John  Jay 129 

Scandals    130 

A  disputed   election 133 

Clinton  awarded  the  office 136 

Burr's  part  in  the  result 137 

Federalist  success  in  1793 ;  Citizen  Genet 141 

The  Seventeenth  Legislature 142 

The   Council  of  Appointment 143 

The    Eighteenth   Legislature 146 

First  appropriation  for  primary  schools 148 

Clinton   retires 149 

CHAPTER  VIII,  1795-1798 

JOHN  JAY 

The  State  campaign  of  1795 150 

Jay  elected   Governor 152 

Jay's   treaty 153 

Rise  of  the  Democracy;  the  Nineteenth  Legislature 155 

Governor   Jay's    recommendations 156 

Anti-slavery  again  suffers  defeat 158 

Census  of  1796 159 

Federalist  success  continues;  the  Twentieth  Legislature 160 

John  Adams  elected  President 161 

The  Twenty-first  Legislature 163 

John  Sloss  Hobart  elected  Senator 164 

Robert  R.  Livingston 168 

Jay  reflected 171 

CHAPTER  IX,  1798-1800 

JAY'S    SECOND    TERM 

Troubles  with  France 172 

Governor  Jay's  support  of  President  Adams 173 

The  Twenty-second  Legislature 174 

Party  strife   and  machinations 176 

The  Virginia   and  Kentucky  resolutions 177 

Burr's    Water    bill 182 

Effects  of  the  Alien   and   Sedition   laws 183 

Democratic  triumph  in  the  spring  of  1800 185 

Hamilton's  activities;  the  Twenty-third  Legislature 187 

Gouverneur   Morris,    Senator 190 

Jay   rejects  Hamilton's   advice 193 

The  Presidential  election  of  1800 — Jefferson's  victory 196 


The  Twenty-fourth  Legislature 198 

Jay  declines  a  third  nomination 202 

CHAPTER  X,  1801 

THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM 

Jay  and  the  Council  of  Appointment 203 

George  Clinton's  seventh  election  as  Governor 210 

The   Constitutional   convention   of   1801 210 

DeWitt  Clinton  upholds  the  Council 212 

Governor   Clinton's   moderation 214 

Domination  of  DeWitt  Clinton 217 

Newspaper    polemics 222 

"Aristides" — Van  Ness  and  Cheetham 224 

The   Swartwout-Clinton   duel 227 

Other  duels;  "Lie  on,  Duane" 228 

CHAPTER  XI,  1802-1804 

THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY 

The  Twenty-fifth  Legislature 230 

DeWitt  Clinton  elected  Senator 232 

Burr  in  disfavor  with  the  Democrats 233 

The  Twenty-sixth   Legislature 233 

McClellan's  defalcation 235 

DeWitt  Clinton  appointed  Mayor  of  New  York  City 236 

The    Twenty-seventh    Legislature 237 

Burr  aspires  to  the  Governorship 238 

Morgan   Lewis   nominated   by  the   Democrats 240 

Hamilton    antagonizes    Burr 242 

Lewis    elected    245 

Burr  challenges  Hamilton 246 

The   fatal   duel 247 

Hamilton's  position  in  history 249,  250 

CHAPTER  XII,  1804-1807 

THE  NEW  ERA 

Governor    Lewis's    respectable    mediocrity 252 

James  Kent  appointed   Chief-Justice 253 

The    Twenty-eighth    Legislature 254 

The    Merchants'    Bank 256 

DeWitt  Clinton  at  odds  with  Lewis 261 

Tammany  takes  a  hand;   the  Martling  Men 264 

The  power  of  the  Livingstons  wanes 265 

The  Twenty-ninth  Legislature 266 

Lewis's  apotheosis  of  the  drum 266 

Quarrels  over  appointments 267 

Bribery  and  the  law 269 

The   Federalists   make   a  spurt 270 


The  Quids;  the  Thirtieth  Legislature 272 

Governor  Lewis  on  the  militia 273 

The  spoils  machine  continues  its  work 274 

DeWitt  Clinton   removed  from  the  Mayoralty 275 

Daniel  D.  Tompkins  nominated  for  Governor 277 

Lewis  runs  in  opposition 278 

Triumph   of  Tompkins 279 

CHAPTER  XIII,  1807-1810 

A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE" 

Classical   similitudes   281 

DeWitt  Clinton's  curious  mistake 282 

Tompkins's   personality 283 

The   Thirty-first  Legislature 284 

The  embargo;   DeWitt  Clinton  changes  his  view 285 

Vice-President  George  Clinton  and  the  Presidential  succession 288 

The  Clintonian  schemes  go  awry 289 

The    Thirty-second    Legislature 290 

George  Clinton  reflected  Vice-President 291 

Abraham  Van  Vechten  and  Daniel  Cady 294,  295 

The  Federalists  carry  the  Assembly 296 

The  Thirty-third   Legislature 298 

The  apostasy  of  Robert  Williams 299 

Governor  Tompkins  rebukes  the  Assembly 302 

John  Tayler's   unseemly  speech 304 

Tompkins   reelected   Governor 305 

Democratic  ascendancy  again  complete 306 

CHAPTER  XIV,  1810-1812 

CLINTON'S  AMBITION 

DeWitt  Clinton  maintains  the  even  tenor  of  his  way 307 

Tammany's  hostility  to  him 308 

The  Thirty-fourth  Legislature 310 

DeWitt  Clinton   reappointed  Mayor 311 

He   is   elected   Lieutenant-Governor 315 

.      The  Thirty-fifth  Legislature 316 

The   famous   prorogation 317 

Death  of  Vice-President  George  Clinton 318 

DeWitt   Clinton's   Presidential   hopes 319 

His  nomination  by  the   Federalists 321 

The   rise  of  Martin   Van   Buren 323 

President  Madison   reelected 324 

The   Thirty-sixth   Legislature 325 

CHAPTER  XV,  1811-1812 

CANALS  AND  BANKS 

Clinton's  mighty  project 326 

The    first    Canal    commission....  ..  327 


Congress  cold   and   Tammany  opposes 328 

Corrupt  bank  schemes 329 

The  Bank  of  America  jobsters 331 

Clinton's    silence 333 

Tompkins  tries  a  heroic  method 334 

After  the  prorogation;  the  Bank  wins 337 

The  Commission  on  Common  Schools 337 

CHAPTER  XVI,  1812-1813 

PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME 

The  Federalists  and  the  War  of  1812 339 

The  Democrats  as  the  War  party 340 

Rufus  King  returns  to  the  Senate 342 

The  first  Superintendent  of  Schools 342 

Appointments  and  removals 343 

The  Bank  of  America  again 345 

Tompkins  once  more  succeeds  himself 349 

His  supreme  position  in  the  Democratic  party 350 

John  Armstrong,  weakling 351 

Clinton    retains    the   Mayoralty 352 

Kent   becomes    Chancellor 353 

Clinton's  abandonment  of  Riker 354 

CHAPTER  XVII,  1814-1816 

TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM 

Significance   of  Tompkins's  third  election 356 

The  Thirty-seventh  Legislature 357 

Federalist   fault-finding 358 

Eliphalet    Nott's    lottery 359 

Democratic  victory  in  1814  heartens  Washington 359 

Fears  for  New  York  City;  financial  woes 361 

The   Governor  endorses   the   notes 362 

Exit  Armstrong;  Thirty-eighth  Legislature 363 

Defensive  measures 364 

The  Hartford  convention 365 

New  York  abettors  of  the  Hartford  movement 366 

Tompkins  declines  the  Secretaryship  of  State 368 

Democratic  factional   rivalries 369 

Ambrose   Spencer  370 

Tompkins   and  Van  Buren 372 

The   Coodies 374 

Tammany  still   pursues   Clinton 375 

He  is  again  ousted  from  the  Mayoralty 376 

The  high  tide  of  Tompkins's  fortunes 377 

The  Thirty-ninth  Legislature 379 

A  contested  election  of  the  olden  time 379 

Canal   progress  382 


CHAPTER  XVIII,  1816-1817 

TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY 

Tompkins  recommended  to  the  Congressional  caucus 383 

His  fourth  election  as  Governor 384 

Monroe  and  Crawford 385 

Madison's   influence   against  Tompkins 386 

Van  Buren  and  Spencer 387 

Monroe  nominated  by  the  caucus 389 

Tompkins  for  Vice-President 389 

The  Fortieth  Legislature 390 

The  bill  abolishing  slavery „ 390 

Tompkins  resigns ;  becomes  Vice-President 393 

Tayler  exercises  the  functions  of  Governor 393 

Canal  progress  continues 394 

A  case  of  honest  graft 395 

CHAPTER  XIX,  1817 

THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON 

Canal  success  in  sight 396 

DeWitt  Clinton  to  the  fore 397 

Ambrose  Spencer's  influence  in  his  favor 398 

Van  Buren's  dilemma 399 

The  Democrats  nominate  Clinton  for  Governor 401 

The  Bucktails;  Clinton's  overwhelming  election 402 

Curious  aspects  of  the  result 404 

Governor  Clinton's  even  course 405 

Establishment  of  Thanksgiving  day 406 

"Making  good"  on  the  canal 407 

CHAPTER  XX,  1818-1819 

DE  WITT   CLINTON,   GOVERNOR 

The  Forty-first  Legislature 408 

Agricultural   interests  409 

Tammany  and   the  Bucktails 410 

Van   Buren's    adroitness 411 

Growing  opposition  to  the  Council  of  Appointment 413 

The  Forty-second  Legislature 414 

Contest  for  Speaker 415 

The  Clintonians   outgeneraled 416 

They  finally  win  a  dubious  victory 417 

Reading  Clinton  out  of  the  party 419 

The  futile  Senatorial  contest  of   1819 421 

The  Bucktails  become  good  Clintonians 422 

Patronage  makes   a  difference 423 

Van  Buren  a  victim  of  the  spoils  system 424 


CHAPTER  XXI,  1819-1820 

THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS 

Tompkins's    accounts 426 

The  merits  of  the  case 427 

The    Comptroller's    view 429 

The   Forty-third    Legislature 430 

Justice  Van  Ness 431 

Tompkins  nominated  for  Governor  by  the  Bucktails 432 

Further  consideration  of  the  accounts 434 

Federalists   support   Tompkins 437 

DeWitt  Clinton   reflected   Governor 438 

Tompkins's   unhappy  end 438 

CHAPTER  XXII,  1820-1821 

BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON 

Partisan    activities 440 

The  question  of  a  Constitutional  convention 441 

Abolition  of  the  Council  of  Appointment  favored  by  Clinton 442 

"Skinner's   Council"   443 

Interferences  of  Federal  office-holders 444 

The   Forty-fourth  Legislature 445 

The  "Green  Bag  Message" 445 

Van   Buren    elected    Senator 446 

Constitutional  convention  bill  passed 448 

Offensive  acts  of  the  Council > 448 

Removal  of  Gideon  Hawley 450 

The  people  vote  for  a  convention 451 

CHAPTER  XXIII,  1821-1822 

A   NEW  CONSTITUTION 

Election  of  Delegates  to  the  convention 453 

Abolition  of  the  Council   of  Revision 454 

Legislative  and   franchise    reforms 455 

^Chancellor  Kent  opposes  universal   suffrage 456 

Sweeping  changes  in  the  appointing  power 457 

The  people  ratify  the  new  Constitution 458 

The  Forty-fifth  Legislature 459 

Approach   of   canal    completion 460 

Ulshoeffer's   attack  on  the   Governor 461 

Abolition  of  the  April  elections 462 

Tompkins   unsuccessfully   seeks   vindication 464 

Regular  Democrats  nominate  Yates  for  Governor 466 

Reasons  for  Clinton's  elimination 467 

Thurlow  Weed's  debut 468 

Yates's  great  victory  at  the  polls 469 

For  INDEX  see  end  of  Volume  II 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

with 

BIOGRAPHIES 

Benson,    Egbert 48 

Burr,  Aaron 176 

Clinton,    Devvitt 416 

Clinton,    George Frontispiece 

Cruger,    John 32 

Duane,    James 80 

Duer,  William 96 

Fish,    Nicholas 304 

Floyd,   William 304 

Fulton,    Robert 336 

Gallatin,   Albert 208 

Hamilton,   Alexander 112 

Jay,    John 48 

Jay,    William 384 

Kent,    James 256 

King,   Rufus 160 

Lansing,    John,    Jr 224 

Lewis,   Francis 96 

Lewis,   Morgan 240 

Livingston,    Edward 224 

Livingston,  Robert  R 144 

Macomb,  Alexander 144 

McDougall,    Alexander 80 

Montgomery,  Richard 64 

Morris,    Gouverneur 192 

Nott,    Eliphalet 352 

Porter,   Peter  B 432 

Rutgers,    Henry 192 

Sanford,    Nathan 448 

Schuyler,   Phillip 64 

Smith,   Melancton 128 

Spencer,    Ambrose 368 

Stuyvesant,    Peter 32 

Tayler,    John 400 

Thompson,   Smith 272 

Tompkins,   Daniel    D 288 

Van  Cortlandt,   Pierre,   Jr 320 

Van    Rensselaer,    Stephen 432 

Walton,  William 112 

Willett,     Marinus ..  320 


FOREWORD 

The  purpose  of  this  work  is  to  furnish  to  the  public 
an  authentic,  thorough  and  dispassionate  account  of 
the  political  and  governmental  development  and  ad- 
ministration of  the  State  of  New  York,  including  a 
careful  and  unbiased  narration  of  the  positions,  for- 
tunes and  acts  of  its  political  parties;  also,  as  sup- 
plementary to  it,  the  fundamentals  of  National  party 
and  political  history, — to  which  the  special  political 
history  of  our  state,  like  that  of  every  other  state,  is 
not  only  inter-related  but  subordinate. 

It  will  be  promptly  conceded  by  every  writer, 
publicist,  educator,  student  or  seeker  for  information 
who  has  had  occasion  to  investigate  any  particular 
phase  of  political  development  of  our  State  or  Nation 
that  it  is  only  by  an  extended  examination  of  numerous 
works  of  history  and  reference  that  anything  like  a 
comprehensive  view  of  a  specific  situation  can  be  ob- 
tained and  even  then,  owing  to  the  prevalent  conflict 
of  authorities,  the  result  is  unsatisfactory. 

Our  government  is  fundamentally  and  essentially  a 
government  by  political  parties,  representative  of  the 
people  and  effectuating  the  will  of  the  majority  of  the 
people  as  expressed  at  the  polls.  Any  purported  his- 
tory of  our  Nation  or  State  which  fails  to  correctly 
depict  the  rise,  growth  and  fall  of  our  National  parties 
and  the  issues  which,  through  their  victories  or  defeats, 
have  been  definitely  settled  by  popular  referendum  is 
absurdly  inadequate,  necessarily  misleading  and  is  not 
entitled  to  recognition.  It  is  lamentably  true,  how- 


ever,  that  the  writing  of  our  general  histories  seems 
to  have  been  left  mainly  to  those  who,  through  lack  of 
practical  experience  in  public  affairs  or  a  false  per- 
spective, have  given  but  scant  or  superficial  attention 
to  the  relations  of  political  parties  to  public  institu- 
tions and  affairs.  To  correct  in  some  measure  this 
condition  and  to  provide  in  a  human,  readable  form  a 
comprehensive,  accurate  and  consecutive  account  of 
the  development  of  the  governmental  agencies  of  our 
state  and  the  records  of  the  dominant  political  parties 
in  their  relation  to  state  and  national  affairs  is  the  task 
here  undertaken. 

The  trite  saying  that  "history  repeats  itself,"  when 
translated,  means  simply  that,  despite  man-made, 
artificial  environment  and  restrictive  measures,  there 
has  been  no  essential  change  in  the  motives  actuating 
the  human  race  in  social  and  governmental  activities; 
consequently  unless  we  have  ready  at  hand  for  care- 
ful study  and  consideration  an  authentic  account  of 
the  political  happenings  that  have  gone  before  we  are 
disqualified  at  the  outset,  not  only  from  expressing  an 
intelligent  opinion  of  the  past  but  also  from  inspiring 
confidence  in  our  judgment  of  the  present  or  future. 

Fully  conscious  of  the  importance  of  the  task  and  of 
the  responsibility  assumed,  I  sincerely  trust  that  this 
work,  both  in  its  general  scheme  and  in  its  manner  of 
execution,  will  commend  itself  to  the  public  and  will 
find  a  permanent  niche  in  standard  American  historical 
literature. 

R.  B.  S. 


CHAPTER  1 
COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS 

NATURE  seems  to  have  designed,  as  the  pro- 
gress of  both  local  and  general  events  has  cer- 
tainly confirmed,  New  York  as  the  Empire 
State — in  population,  industry,  commerce,  wealth,  and 
social  and  political  influence  the  foremost  member  of 
the  American  Union.  Its  geographical  situation  and 
its  physical  characteristics  gave  it  preeminent  advan- 
tages over  all  the  other  Colonies.  Although  exceeded 
in  area  by  two  others,  its  strategic  place  was  indubitably 
supreme.  Its  territory  extended,  as  did  that  of  no  other, 
from  the  Atlantic  littoral  to  the  Great  Lakes.  Upon 
the  former  it  had  the  finest  harbor  in  the  whole  conti- 
nent, and  upon  the  latter  it  had  an  extended  frontage, 
while  between  the  two  it  had  an  unrivalled  natural 
highway  for  travel  and  trade,  half  the  distance  on  a 
great  arm  of  the  sea  navigable  for  ocean-going  craft, 
and  half  across  a  level,  rich,  and  well-watered  country. 
Nowhere  else,  from  Maine  to  Georgia,  was  access  from 
the  coast  to  the  basin  of  the  Great  Lakes  and  to  the 
valleys  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  the  Mississippi  nearly 
as  easy  and  as  expeditious  as  through  New  York. 

Climate  and  topography  were  comparable  with  situ- 
ation. Midway  between  New  England  and  the  south, 
it  had  a  moderate  climate,  and  this,  with  its  variety  of 
soils,  made  it  able  to  produce  in  abundance  a  greater 
number  of  the  useful  fruits  of  the  earth  than  any  of  its 

17 


18  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

sister  Colonies.  Above  the  others,  too,  it  was  well 
wooded  and  well  watered  for  purposes  of  both  industry 
and  commerce.  These  conditions  fitted  it  to  be  self- 
sustaining  and  independent  to  a  greater  degree,  perhaps, 
than  any  other;  and  made  it  capable  of  maintaining 
comfortably  and  prosperously  a  larger  population  than 
even  those  two  which  had  a  larger  area. 

Such  supremacy  in  numbers  it  did  not,  however, 
enjoy  at  the  beginning.  During  the  Revolution  it  was 
probably  one  of  the  smaller  Colonies.  When  the  first 
census  was  taken,  in  1790,  it  stood  only  fifth,  having 
fewer  than  half  as  many  inhabitants  as  Virginia,  and 
being  surpassed  also  by  Pennsylvania,  North  Carolina, 
and  Massachusetts.  At  the  second  census,  in  1800,  it 
had  risen  to  third  place  and  was  exceeded  in  population 
by  only  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania.  In  1810  it  was 
second,  with  only  Virginia  exceeding  it;  and  at  every 
subsequent  census  it  has  stood  first  by  a  plurality  which 
made  rivalry  by  any  other  State  seem  quite  hopeless. 

The  character  of  the  aboriginal  inhabitants  must  also 
be  taken  into  account,  perhaps  not  so  much  for  its  influ- 
ence upon  the  development  of  the  State  as  for  its  indica- 
tion of  the  importance  of  its  territory  in  pre-Columbian 
days.  In  other  parts  of  the  country  there  are  more 
noteworthy  material  monuments  of  Indian  life  and 
civilization;  but  nowhere  else  did  the  social  and  politi- 
cal organization  of  the  natives  attain  so  high  a  degree, 
or  were  their  religion,  laws,  and  arts  of  civilization  so 
elaborately  developed,  as  among  the  Six  Nations  of  the 
Long  House.  That  confederacy  not  only  possessed  and 
occupied  the  greater  part  of  the  area  of  the  present 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  19 

State  of  New  York,  but  it  ruled  supreme  over  all  the 
tribes  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Mississippi  and  from  the 
St.  Lawrence  to  the  Tennessee.  For  a  century  preced- 
ing its  statehood,  New  York  was  thus  the  seat  of  an 
Indian  empire  surpassed  in  importance  and  culture 
only  by  those  of  the  Mayas,  the  Aztecs,  and  the  Incas. 
North  of  the  Rio  Grande  it  was  supreme. 

It  was,  however,  in  the  circumstances  and  character 
of  its  settlement  and  colonization  that  New  York  had 
the  greatest  advantage  over  its  neighbors  and  received 
most  deeply  and  puissantly  the  assured  impress  of 
potential  empire.  It  was  the  one  cosmopolitan  Colony. 
Every  other  one  was  founded,  settled,  and  developed  by 
the  British — chiefly  by  the  English — and  was  under 
unbroken  British  rule  from  the  beginning  down  to  the 
Revolution.  Of  every  other  one  the  antecedents,  tra- 
ditions, sympathies,  aspirations  were  all  pure  British. 
Every  other  one  was  substantially  homogeneous  in 
composition,  for  in  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania  the 
considerable  non-British  elements  were  not  sufficient 
materially  to  affect  the  political  and  social  order.  But 
New  York  was  composite  in  race,  in  language,  in 
religion,  and  in  social  and  political  traditions.  It  had 
been  founded  and  settled  by  the  Dutch,  and  for  one- 
fourth  of  its  ante-Revolutionary  history  had  been  a 
Dutch  colony,  under  Dutch  government.  Then  it  had 
been  acquired  and  further  settled  by  the  English,  and 
for  the  remaining  three-fourths  of  its  colonial  life  it  had 
been  under  British  rule.  In  addition,  it  had  received  a 
considerable  and  very  influential  admixture  of  French 
colonists,  of  the  very  best  type  of  the  French  nation  of 


20  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

that  day.  Thus  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution  its  popu- 
lation was  tripartite,  and  each  of  the  three  elements 
inherited  and  cherished  the  language,  the  laws,  the 
customs,  the  traditions,  the  ideals,  and  the  religious 
faith  and  worship  of  its  respective  mother  country. 

The  result  was  a  degree  of  catholicity  and  liberality 
superior  to  that  of  most  other  Colonies.  Massachusetts 
and  Connecticut  were  intolerantly  puritan,  and  Vir- 
ginia was  no  less  intolerantly  cavalier.  But  New  York 
was  neither.  The  dominant  elements,  both  ecclesias- 
tical and  civil,  were  the  Dutch  Reformed,  the  English 
Establishment,  and  the  Huguenot.  But  the  English 
Establishment  in  New  York  was  far  less  bigoted  and 
oppressive  than  in  Virginia,  and  non-conformists  and 
dissenters  and  all  others  flourished  in  peace  and  free- 
dom. 

At  the  same  time,  side  by  side  with  this  notable  degree 
of  liberality,  there  prevailed  in  New  York  in  some 
respects  a  higher  degree  of  feudalism  and  arrogance 
than  in  any  other  Colony.  Far  more  than  any  other,  it 
was  physically  owned  and  was  socially  and  politically 
dominated  by  great  families,  which  maintained  a  quasi- 
baronial,  almost  semi-regal  state.  Some  of  these  were 
Dutch,  some  were  English  or  Scotch  or  Irish,  and  a  few 
were  French;  while  of  course  some  through  inter- 
marriage blended  all  these  stocks.  The  Colonial  and 
Revolutionary  history  of  New  York  is  largely  a  his- 
tory of  the  alliances  and  feuds  of  these  families  and 
their  retainers,  and  indeed  for  many  of  its  early  years 
the  story  of  the  State  of  New  York  was  marked  deeply 
by  the  same  influences. 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  21 

The  Colony  which  these  circumstances  marked  and 
set  apart  as  peculiar  and  unique  among  its  neighbors 
was  chartered  as  New  Netherland  by  the  Dutch  gov- 
ernment in  1614,  and  was  in  1623  extensively  settled  by 
that  enterprising  and  masterful  people,  both  its  present 
metropolis  and  its  present  capital  being  founded  by 
them  in  that  year.  For  half  a  century  it  remained  in 
Dutch  possession  and  developed  Dutch  institutions. 
Nevertheless,  the  English  were  already  invading  it 
from  their  adjacent  Colonial  possessions  to  such  an 
extent  that  when  its  first  Landtag  or  Legislature  was 
formed  and  assembled,  in  1653,  it  contained  ten  Dutch 
and  nine  English  members,  representing  four  Dutch 
and  four  English  towns.  In  1664  it  was  taken  outright 
by  the  English  and  became  New  York,  and  with  the 
exception  of  a  very  brief  period  it  remained  under 
British  rule  until  the  Revolution  of  1776. 

The  real  political  organization  of  New  York  may  be 
regarded  as  dating  from  1683.  At  that  time  it  was 
divided  into  twelve  counties.  With  two  of  these  we 
need  not  concern  ourselves,  since  they  were  soon  there- 
after ceded  to  the  Colonies  to  which  they  logically 
belonged.  They  were  Cornwall,  now  a  part  of  the 
State  of  Maine,  and  Dukes,  now  the  insular  portion  of 
Massachusetts.  The  ten  counties  still  contained  in  New 
York  were  New  York,  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond, 
Suffolk,  Westchester,  Dutchess,  Orange,  Ulster,  and 
Albany.  The  five  first  named  had  boundaries  which 
have  continued  practically  unchanged  down  to  recent 
years.  The  names  of  the  others  have  remained  upon 
the  map,  but  their  boundaries  have  been  much  changed 


22  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

by  the  setting  off  of  portions  of  their  areas  for  the  for- 
mation of  new  counties.  Thereafter  each  county 
regarded  itself  as  a  semi-independent  political  and  civic 
unit,  and  progressively  developed  its  own  character- 
istics. Each  county  differed  to  some  extent,  in  some 
cases  radically,  from  its  neighbors,  and  thus  another 
element  of  heterogeneity  was  added  to  those  which  have 
already  been  noted  as  characterizing  the  Colony  as  a 
whole. 

During  the  ante-Revolutionary  period  this  composite 
character  of  New  York  had  two  important  effects.  It 
made  the  Colony  less  inclined  toward  independence,  or 
even  toward  revolution  without  independence,  than 
some  others,  notably  Massachusetts  and  Virginia;  but 
it  also  made  it  one  of  the  most  aggressively  and  effi- 
ciently inclined  toward  some  form  of  Colonial  union. 
The  first  step  in  the  latter  direction,  which  was  also, 
though  then  quite  unconsciously  and  unintentionally, 
in  the  former  direction,  was  taken  in  1754.  In  that 
year,  in  view  of  the  great  war  which  was  then  begin- 
ning, and  doubtless  with  a  certain  subconscious 
prescience  of  its  epochal  importance  in  Colonial  affairs, 
seven  of  the  Colonies  sent  delegates  to  a  convention 
which  was  to  consider  the  formation  of  a  Colonial  con- 
federation, on  the  basis  of  articles  drafted  by  Benjamin 
Franklin.  The  seven  Colonies  were  New  York,  New 
Hampshire,  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut, 
Pennsylvania,  and  Maryland,  and  their  delegates  met 
in  convention  at  Albany,  in  New  York. 

That  was  the  first  faint  and  unrecognized  conception 
of  the  United  States,  and  it  occurred  appropriately  on 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  23 

the  soil  of  New  York,  partly  because  it  was  a  convenient 
place  midway  between  north  and  south,  and  partly 
because  it  was  in  a  Colony  so  mixed  and  varying  in 
sentiment  and  tendencies  as  to  make  its  secure  enlist- 
ment in  such  a  movement  as  desirable  as  it  might  be 
difficult.  It  was  indeed  found  that  while  a  strong 
inclination  toward  Colonial  confederation  undoubtedly 
existed,  the  political  sentiment  of  New  York  was  much 
less  unanimous  than  in  any  other  Colony;  a  condition 
which  increased  in  intensity  with  the  passage  of  time 
and  the  development  of  events.  The  causes  of  this 
division  of  sentiment  were  not  obscure  or  complex. 
The  unequalled  port  facilities  of  New  York  and  indeed 
of  all  the  Hudson  River  towns  made  travel  and  com- 
munication between  them  and  England  easy,  direct,  and 
intimate ;  the  frequent  and  numerous  presence  of  British 
civil  and  military  officials  resulted  in  the  maintenance 
of  something  like  petty  viceregal  courts;  and  the  great 
families  with  their  vast  hereditary  estates  created  a 
domestic  and  social  life  not  unlike  that  of  England 
itself.  These  circumstances  naturally  and  strongly 
tended  toward  loyalty  to  the  crown.  On  the  other  hand 
the  large  and  influential  Dutch  element,  and  the  small 
but  singularly  efficient  and  influential  Huguenot  ele- 
ment, had  no  sentimental  attachment  to  the  British 
crown,  the  former  indeed  still  cherishing  some  hostility 
toward  it;  and  the  mercantile  element,  which  was  con- 
stantly and  rapidly  growing  in  numbers  and  influence, 
resented  the  commercial  disabilities  and  later  the  taxes 


24  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

which  the  British  government  arbitrarily  imposed. 
These  factors  increasingly  made  for  the  development  of 
a  spirit  of  local  patriotism. 

The  first  direct  word  of  opposition,  or  of  remon- 
strance, against  British  misgovernment  was  spoken  on 
December  1 1,  1762,  near  the  end  of  that  fateful  French 
and  Indian-Seven  Years'  War  which  probably  had  a 
greater  influence  upon  the  affairs  of  the  world  than  any 
other  for  several  centuries,  and  in  which  were  sown  the 
unmistakable  seeds  of  American  independence.  On  the 
date  named  an  earnest  and  protracted  controversy  over 
the  tenure  of  office  and  the  payment  of  salaries  of  Judges 
culminated  in  the  adoption  by  the  New  York  Colonial 
Assembly  of  a  memorial  to  the  king,  urging  the  neces- 
sity of  judicial  independence  and  asking  for  a  hearing 
upon  the  subject.  This  was  followed  during  the  next 
three  years  with  other  memorials,  protesting  against  the 
sugar  tax  and  other  forms  of  that  "taxation  without 
representation"  which  had  been  devised  to  meet  the 
expenses  of  the  war.  The  memorials  and  addresses  of 
Philip  Livingston,  William  Bayard,  and  Frederick 
Philipse  at  this  time  were,  indeed,  not  unworthy  of 
rank  by  the  side  of  those  of  Otis,  Henry,  Adams,  and 
the  other  Massachusetts  and  Virginia  statesmen  who 
have  enjoyed  more  popular  prominence  in  history 
books,  but  who  were  no  whit  superior  to  their  contem- 
poraries of  New  York  in  patriotic  spirit  or  in  the  power 
to  give  it  expression.  Nor  were  popular  demonstra- 
tions of  resentment  at  British  oppression  lacking.  New 
York  City,  as  a  commercial  center,  was  a  favorite  resort 
of  British  naval  vessels  for  the  purpose  of  impressing 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  25 

merchant  seamen  into  the  service.  When  in  June,  1764, 
four  sailors  were  thus  seized,  the  populace  rose  against 
the  frigate  whose  officers  had  ordered  the  detestable 
job,  seized  the  captain's  barge,  drew  it  ashore,  and 
burned  it;  and  the  courts  were  conveniently  unable  to 
detect  the  perpetrators  of  the  deed. 

While  therefore  there  was  a  larger  proportion  of 
British  sympathizers — loyalists,  or  tories — in  New 
York  than  in  any  other  Colony,  there  was  also  a  large 
number  of  patriots  who  were  second  to  no  others  in  all 
America  in  resistance  to  misgovernment,  in  clearness 
of  vision  of  the  coming  contest,  and  in  steadfast  resolu- 
tion and  devotion  to  the  cause  of  liberty,  even  to  the 
extent,  if  necessary,  of  forcible  separation  from  the 
mother  country.  Indeed,  what  we  may  consider  the 
first  really  significant  step  toward  separation  was  taken 
by  the  Colonial  Assembly  of  New  York  on  October  18, 
1764.  Ten  years  before,  at  Albany,  as  already  related, 
New  York  had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the  movement 
for  a  Colonial  confederation.  Now  it  took  the  initiative 
in  making  that  confederation  an  agency  of  hostility  to 
British  rule.  This  the  Assembly,  in  response  to  indubi- 
table popular  demands,  did  by  investing  a  committee 
with  authority  to  enter  into  correspondence  with  similar 
committees  appointed  by  the  other  Colonial  Assemblies, 
or  with  the  Assemblies  themselves  in  default  of  such 
committees,  "on  the  subject  matter  of  the  act  commonly 
called  the  Sugar  act;  of  the  act  restraining  paper  bills 
of  credit  in  the  Colonies  from  being  legal  tender;  of  the 
several  other  acts  of  Parliament  lately  passed  with  rela- 
tion to  the  trade  of  the  northern  Colonies;  and  also  on 


26  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  subject  of  the  impending  dangers  which  threatened 
the  Colonies  of  being  taxed  by  laws  to  be  passed  in 
Great  Britain."  This  was  eight  years  in  advance  of 
Samuel  Adams's  famous  motion  at  a  Boston  town  meet- 
ing for  the  appointment  of  a  Committee  of  Correspond- 
ence "to  state  the  rights  of  the  colonists." 

Adams's  action  in  1772  is  commonly  credited  with 
having  led  to  the  summoning  of  the  first  Continental 
Congress.  The  action  of  New  York  in  1764  led  to  the 
summoning  of  the  first  real  Colonial  Congress,  though 
it  was  on  the  specific  invitation  of  Massachusetts  that 
the  body  met.  This  Congress  assembled  in  New  York 
City  in  October,  1765,  and  was  participated  in  by  all  the 
Colonies  but  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  and  Georgia. 
Because  of  the  marked  division  of  popular  sentiment, 
no  election  of  Delegates  to  it  was  held  in  New  York,  but 
the  Committee  of  Correspondence  served  as  the  Col- 
ony's representatives  and  as  such  took  a  leading  part  in 
the  transactions.  Three  important  instruments  were 
adopted,  of  which  two  were  written  by  New  York  men. 
James  Otis  of  Massachusetts  wrote  the  address  to  Par- 
liament, but  Philip  Livingston  of  New  York  wrote  the 
petition  to  the  crown,  and  John  Cruger  of  New  York 
wrote  the  declaration  of  rights  and  grievances 
addressed  to  the  people  of  both  America  and  Great 
Britain,  in  which  "the  right  of  taxing  themselves  either 
personally  or  by  representatives  of  their  own  choosing, 
the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  and  the  right  of  petition"  were 
claimed  as  inalienably  belonging  to  the  colonists. 

While  this  Congress  was  in  session  the  Stamp  act 
went  into  effect,  and  the  merchants  of  New  York  took 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  27 

the  lead  in  opposition  and  even  in  physical  resistance 
to  it.  A  committee  was  formed  to  seek  the  cooperation 
of  the  other  Colonies,  and  it  was  publicly  advertised 
that  the  persons  and  properties  of  all  who  distributed  or 
used  the  obnoxious  stamped  paper  would  be  in  grave 
peril.  The  royal  Lieutenant-Governor,  Cadwallader 
Golden,  and  Lord  Bute,  the  British  Minister  who  was 
held  chiefly  responsible  for  the  policy  of  the  govern- 
ment, were  hanged  and  burned  in  effigy  in  The  Fields, 
now  City  Hall  Park;  Colden's  state  coach  was  also 
burned ;  the  cannon  at  the  Battery  were  spiked ;  and  the 
house  of  the  commander  of  the  royal  artillery  was 
sacked,  its  contents  were  burned,  and  the  colors  of  the 
regiment  were  seized  and  carried  away  by  the  mob. 

This  was  no  irresponsible  mob.  It  was  led  by  some 
of  the  best  men  of  New  York,  and  its  work  was  followed 
up  with  further  less  violent  but  no  less  resolute  and 
effective  action.  The  "Sons  of  Liberty,"  led  by  Isaac 
Sears,  Marinus  Willett,  John  Lamb,  and  Alexander 
McDougall,  took  the  lead  in  a  systematic  propaganda 
against  the  Stamp  act.  John  Cruger,  then  Mayor  of 
the  city,  Robert  R.  Livingston,  John  Stevens,  and 
Beverly  Robinson  called  upon  Colden  and  demanded 
assurances  that  the  stamps  and  stamped  paper  would  not 
be  used.  The  Common  Council  demanded  that  Colden 
surrender  the  stamps  to  it,  which  he  did;  and  Colden 
wrote  to  the  British  ministry  that  the  action  of  New 
York  was  being  watched  by  the  other  Colonies  and 
would  be  followed  by  them  as  an  example.  Neither 
Colden  nor  Sir  Henry  Moore,  who  became  Governor  in 
that  same  month,  made  any  attempt  to  distribute  or  sell 


28  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  stamps,  and  the  law  remained  unenforced  until  its 
repeal  in  the  following  March.  That  repeal  was 
greeted  in  New  York  with  joy  as  great  as  the  wrath 
which  had  been  manifested  at  the  adoption  of  the  act. 
Statues  of  George  III  and  William  Pitt  were  erected, 
at  Bowling  Green  and  in  Wall  Street  respectively,  and 
a  great  "liberty  pole"  was  set  up  at  the  Battery.  Bon- 
fires, music,  and  public  feastings  further  emphasized 
the  gratification  and  exultation  of  a  people  who  sin- 
cerely wished  to  remain  loyal  to  their  king  but  who 
valued  liberty  and  the  rights  of  British  subjects  more 
highly  than  their  allegiance  to  the  crown. 

Joy  was,  however,  short  lived.  A  few  months  later 
violent  antagonism  was  renewed  over  the  action  of  the 
British  government  in  quartering  troops  in  New  York 
at  New  York's  expense.  British  soldiers  cut  down  the 
liberty  pole  and  wounded  with  their  bayonets  several 
citizens  who  were  trying  to  put  it  up  again — the  first 
blood  of  American  patriots  shed  by  British  soldiers  in 
the  Revolution.  Twice  the  Assembly  refused  the 
appropriations  which  the  Governor  demanded  for  pay- 
ment of  the  expenses  of  the  troops,  and  in  retaliation 
Parliament,  in  June,  1767,  forbade  the  Assembly  to 
pass  any  other  act  until  it  had  made  provision  for  the 
troops.  The  Assembly  was  resolute,  and  for  the  remain- 
der of  its  legal  life  did  nothing. 

But  the  arbitrary  British  prohibition  invoked  its  own 
Nemesis.  A  new  Assembly  was  elected  in  1768,  in 
which  the  patriotic  party  was  still  stronger  than  in  the 
old  one,  and  in  which  the  significant  and  formidable 
figures  of  Philip  Schuyler  of  Albany  and  George  Clin- 


COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  29 

ton  of  Ulster  first  appeared  and  assumed  leadership. 
Schuyler  drafted  (probably)  and  the  Assembly  adopted 
a  memorial  condemning  the  interference  of  Parliament 
with  the  Assembly  as  unconstitutional  and  declaring 
that  the  power  and  authority  of  the  Assembly  could  not 
be  lawfully  suspended  or  abridged  by  any  power  what- 
soever, save  only  the  prerogative  of  the  crown  to 
prorogue  and  to  dissolve  it.  Three  days  later  the  Gov- 
ernor took  the  Assembly  at  its  word  and  dissolved  it  as 
a  body  too  dangerous  to  be  tolerated.  So  the  strife  con- 
tinued, fluctuating  but  generally  increasing  in  intensity 
and  violence,  both  between  the  Americans  and  the 
British  soldiers  and  functionaries  and  also  between  the 
two  factions  of  Americans.  The  De  Lanceys,  Philipses, 
and  some  other  great  families  staunchly  supported  the 
British  government,  even  in  its  most  arbitrary  and 
purblind  policies,  while  the  Schuylers,  Livingstons, 
Clintons,  and  others  were  leaders  of  the  patriotic  oppo- 
sition. 

The  "Sons  of  Liberty,"  the  "Mohawks,"  and  other 
organizations  increased  their  activities,  not  hesitating 
on  occasion  to  measure  strength  with  the  soldiery.  On 
January  18,  1770,  occurred  the  "battle"  of  Golden  Hill, 
on  John  Street  between  William  and  Cliff  streets,  and 
the  next  day  a  sailor  was  fatally  bayoneted  by  a  British 
soldier,  the  first  life  lost  in  the  Revolution.  There  fol- 
lowed three  years  later  a  grave  contest  over  the  attempt 
to  import  taxed  tea.  In  the  fall  of  1773  the  "Sons  of 
Liberty"  and  "Mohawks"  kept  a  continuous  watch  for 
the  expected  coming  of  tea-laden  vessels,  with  the  pur- 
pose of  driving  them  away  if  not  of  destroying  them, 


30  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1774 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

and  a  new  Committee  of  Correspondence,  which  was  in 
effect  a  vigilance  committee,  was  organized.  A  New 
York  merchant  who  had  declared  in  favor  of  landing 
the  tea  in  spite  of  the  "rebels"  was  burned  in  effigy,  and 
a  proclamation  was  made  by  the  "Sons  of  Liberty"  that 
any  one  who  should  aid  in  landing  the  tea,  or  cart  it,  or 
buy  it,  would  be  regarded  as  "an  enemy  of  the  liberties 
of  America." 

Boston  has  the  historic  honor  of  having  been  the  scene 
of  the  "tea  party,"  when,  in  December,  1773,  her  citi- 
zens disguised  as  Indians  threw  overboard  the  obnox- 
ious cargo  of  taxed  tea  which  had  been  sent  to  that  port. 
But  it  was  only  through  a  chance  freak  of  the  weather 
that  New  York  lost  that  distinction.  The  tea  ships 
designed  for  New  York  should  have  reached  that  port 
before  the  other  reached  Boston,  and  had  they  done  so 
their  reception  would  have  been  probably  even  more 
strenuously  rude  than  that  of  their  consort  at  Boston. 
But  they  were  blown  out  of  their  course  by  storms,  put 
in  at  Antigua  for  safety  and  repairs,  and  did  not  reach 
New  York  until  the  following  April.  The  "Nancy," 
first  to  arrive,  was  stopped  in  the  Lower  Bay  and  held 
there  for  a  week  without  unloading  a  pound  of  tea. 
The  "London,"  her  consort,  arrived  a  day  later  with  a 
cargo  of  tea  brought  in  by  her  captain  as  a  private  spec- 
ulation. The  Committee  of  Correspondence  stopped 
her,  declared  her  cargo  confiscated,  threw  every  case 
of  the  tea  into  the  river,  and  sent  the  captain  home  to 
England  on  the  "Nancy,"  which  sailed  at  the  end  of  a 
week. 


1774]  COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  31 

These  were  strenuous  doings.  But  they  were  not 
altogether  approved,  even  by  some  of  the  most  earnest 
patriots.  Conservatism  was  strong  in  New  York  City 
at  that  early  date,  and  there  was  a  widespread  feeling 
that  more  orderly  procedure  was  needed  than  that  of 
the  Vigilance  Committee.  Accordingly  in  May  of  that 
year,  a  few  weeks  after  the  tea  ships  episode,  a  new 
Committee  of  Fifty-One  was  formed,  partly  for  the 
purpose  of  restraining  the  radicalism  of  the  "Sons  of 
Liberty"  but  chiefly  for  that  of  directing  radical  ener- 
gies into  more  methodical  channels.  Already,  in  April, 
Isaac  Sears  and  Alexander  McDougall  had  written,  in 
the  name  of  the  Vigilance  Committee,  to  the  Boston 
leaders,  pledging  the  support  of  New  York  in  any 
measures  which  might  be  adopted.  On  May  23  the  new 
committee  was  organized,  and  it  entered  forthwith  upon 
the  work  of  corresponding  with  the  other  Colonies. 
This  function  was  entrusted  to  a  sub-committee  consist- 
ing of  Isaac  Low,  James  Duane,  and  John  Jay.  Alex- 
ander McDougall  was  at  first  a  member,  but  he  resigned 
from  it  when  the  others  would  not  agree  to  his  scheme 
of  first  of  all  stopping  all  trade  with  England,  and  when 
they  repudiated  the  letter  which  he  and  Sears  had  sent 
to  Boston. 

This  sub-committee  on  the  evening  of  May  23  per- 
formed an  epochal  act.  This  was  the  adoption  of  a 
letter,  written  by  John  Jay,  addressed  to  the  leaders  in 
Boston,  urging  that  there  should  be  called  at  once  "a 
Congress  of  Deputies  from  the  Colonies  in  general,"  at 
which  unanimous  action  should  be  agreed  upon,  not 
only  concerning  the  closing  of  the  port  of  Boston  but 


32  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1774 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

also  "for  the  security  of  our  common  rights."  To  this 
body,  Jay  added,  should  be  left  the  question  of  the 
advisability  of  adopting  a  non-importation  agreement 
by  all  the  Colonies.  This  letter,  rather  than  Adams's 
motion  in  1772,  already  referred  to,  was  the  real  initia- 
tive of  the  first  Continental  Congress.  It  was  the  first 
practical  suggestion  of  united  action  for  the  common 
welfare  of  all.  It  did  not  instantly  evoke  a  favorable 
response,  but  it  is  noteworthy  that  its  author  and  his 
colleagues  had  so  much  faith  in  its  ultimate  success  that 
they  promptly  issued  a  call  for  a  meeting  on  July  19,  at 
which  Delegates  to  the  proposed  Congress  should  be 
chosen.  It  may  be  added  that  the  Connecticut  Com- 
mittee of  Correspondence  concurred  in  the  scheme  on 
June  4,  Rhode  Island  through  its  General  Assembly  on 
June  15,  the  General  Court  of  Massachusetts  on  June 
17,  and  a  citizens'  meeting  at  Philadelphia  on  June  18. 

The  "Sons  of  Liberty"  in  the  Vigilance  Committee 
were  not  willing,  however,  to  relinquish  the  leadership 
to  the  Committee  of  Fifty-One  without  a  struggle. 
Accordingly  they  issued  an  unsigned  call  for  a  popular 
meeting  in  The  Fields  on  the  evening  of  July  6.  At  this 
gathering  McDougall  presided,  and  speeches  were  made 
and  resolutions  adopted  in  favor  of  resenting  the  closing 
of  the  port  of  Boston  by  stopping  all  commercial  inter- 
course with  Great  Britain.  The  meeting  is  chiefly 
remembered,  however,  because  it  was  interrupted  by  a 
young  college  undergraduate,  who  forced  his  way  upon 
the  platform  and  made  an  address  uninvited  and  unin- 


PETER  STUYVESAVT 

Peter  Stuyvesant,  Dutch  Governor  of  N'ew  Amsterdam;  horn 
in  Holland,  1592;  traveled  and  fought  in  the  West  Indies; 
appointed  director  general  of  New  Amsterdam  July  28,  1646 
and  took  possession  May  11,  1647;  superceded  by  Richard 
Xicolls  when  Charles  II  gave  the  province  to  his  brother, 
James,  Duke  of  York,  September  8,  1664;  died  in  N'ew  York 
City,  August,  1682. 


JOHX  CRUGER 

John  Cruger,  colonial  mayor  of  New  York  City;  born  in 
New  York  City  July  18,  1710;  shipping  merchant;  alderman 
of  dock  ward,  1754;  mayor,  1739-1743,  1757-1765;  member 
general  assembly,  1759-1768;  speaker  last  colonial  assembly, 
1769-75;  retired  to  Kinderhook  during  the  war  but  afterward 
returned  to  New  York  City  where  he  died,  December  27,  1792. 


1774]  COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  33 

troduced,  which  was  for  eloquence  and  power  decid- 
edly the  chief  speech  of  the  occasion.  That  lad  was 
Alexander  Hamilton. 

The  retort  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty-One  came 
promptly  and  sharp  the  next  morning.  It  condemned 
the  meeting  and  its  resolutions  as  calculated  to  "excite 
disunion  among  our  fellow-citizens,"  which  had  doubt- 
less been  their  purpose.  It  also  appointed  a  new  com- 
mittee, including  McDougall  and  Sears,  to  draft  new 
resolutions.  McDougall  and  Sears  refused  to  serve,  and 
with  nine  of  their  comrades  withdrew  from  the  Com- 
mittee of  Fifty-One.  A  new  committee  was  then 
named,  with  Jay  as  a  member,  and  it  reported  resolu- 
tions declaring  an  earnest  desire  to  remain  British  sub- 
jects, but  condemning  the  closing  of  the  port  of  Boston 
as  "subversive  of  every  idea  of  British  liberty,"  and 
leaving  the  method  of  dealing  therewith  to  the  Conti- 
nental Congress  which  was  to  be  constituted.  These 
resolutions  were  adopted  by  the  whole  committee,  and 
it  was  decided  to  present  at  the  meeting  of  July  19  the 
names  of  Philip  Livingston,  John  Alsop,  Isaac  Low, 
James  Duane,  and  John  Jay  as  candidates  for  member- 
ship in  the  Continental  Congress.  At  the  meeting  all 
five  were  elected,  in  spite  of  a  determined  effort  by  the 
remains  of  the  Vigilance  Committee  to  substitute 
McDougall  for  Jay.  Delegates  were  also  chosen  by 
Kings,  Suffolk,  and  Orange  counties — Simon  Boerum, 
William  Floyd,  and  John  Haring,  respectively;  Queens 
county  and  Richmond  held  aloof,  and  the  other  com- 
munities up  the  Hudson,  including  Albany,  requested 
the  New  York  City  Delegates  to  represent  them  also. 


34  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1774 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  resolutions  were,  however,  rejected  by  the  meeting 
of  July  19,  and  for  that  reason  all  the  Delegates  except 
Duane  refused  to  accept  their  election;  for  the  addi- 
tional reason,  also,  that  they  did  not  consider  the  meet- 
ing fairly  representative  of  the  citizenship  of  New 
York,  and  thought  that  the  Delegates  should  be  chosen 
at  a  regularly  held  election.  Accordingly  an  election 
was  held,  with  polling  places  in  each  ward,  on  July  28 ; 
and  thereat  the  four  candidates  were  unanimously 
elected. 

Thus  was  harmony  restored  between  the  two  parties 
or  factions  which  had  arisen  and  which  for  a  time  had 
threatened  by  their  discordant  rivalry  seriously  to  com- 
promise the  patriot  cause.  Livingston  and  Jay  (who 
was  married  to  a  daughter  of  William  Livingston)  were 
leaders  of  the  aristocracy,  of  the  great  families,  the 
landed  proprietors,  and  the  merchants,  while  Sears  and 
McDougall  represented  the  democracy,  the  mechanics, 
and  petty  tradesmen.  From  this  time  forward  until 
after  the  Revolution,  partisanship  was  largely  sub- 
merged by  the  rising  tide  of  patriotism. 

In  the  Continental  Congress  the  New  York  Delegates 
filled  an  honorable  place.  Duane  took  the  lead  in  favor- 
ing recognition  of  the  Navigation  acts,  though  John 
Adams  actually  made  the  motion  to  that  effect.  Living- 
ston and  Jay  were  members  of  the  committee  on  the 
Declaration  of  Rights,  of  which  Richard  Henry  Lee 
was  chairman,  and  it  was  Jay  who  drafted  that  mem- 
orable document.  He  also  wrote  the  no  less  notable 
Address  of  Congress  to  the  People  of  Great  Britain, 
which  Jefferson,  before  he  knew  the  authorship,  enthu- 


1775]  COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  35 

siastically  declared  to  be  "a  production  of  the  finest  pen 
in  America,"  as  indeed  it  was.  It  is  to  be  recalled  that 
the  Congress  took  action  in  favor  of  the  non-importation 
which  McDougall  and  the  Sons  of  Liberty  had  been 
advocating,  and  in  consequence  the  Delegates  on  their 
return  to  New  York  were  publicly  commended  in  the 
strongest  manner  by  their  former  critics  and  opponents 
of  the  democratic  side.  Jay  himself  was  unanimously 
elected  a  member  of  a  new  Committee  of  Sixty,  which 
superseded  the  Committee  of  Fifty-One  and  which  was 
specially  charged  with  the  work  of  enforcing  the  non- 
importation rule. 

Meantime  the  New  York  Colonial  Assembly  was  the 
scene  of  almost  incessant  strife  between  the  patriots  and 
the  loyalists,  or  tories,  and  was  in  membership  almost 
equally  divided  between  them,  though  the  tories  usually 
had  a  majority.  It  refused  to  consider  the  proceedings 
of  the  Congress,  or  to  thank  the  New  York  Delegates 
for  their  services,  or  to  publish  the  correspondence 
between  New  York  and  Connecticut  and  with  Edmund 
Burke,  or  to  thank  the  merchants  for  supporting  the 
non-importation  agreement.  It  also  refused  to  consider 
the  question  of  electing  Delegates  to  the  second  session 
of  Congress,  in  May,  1775;  and  then  it  performed  its 
last  act  of  grace  by  committing  suicide.  On  April  3, 
1775,  it  adjourned  to  May  3,  and  it  never  met  again. 

Upon  the  refusal  of  the  moribund  Assembly  to  pro- 
vide for  the  election  of  Delegates  to  the  Congress,  the 
Committee  of  Sixty,  or  of  Inspection,  as  it  was  officially 
called,  assumed  that  authority,  and  it  accordingly  issued 
a  call  to  the  various  counties  to  elect  another  committee, 


36  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1775 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

consisting  of  one  hundred  members  representing  all 
parts  of  the  Colony.  This  was  known  as  the  Committee 
of  Observation,  but  was  really  a  Committee  of  Public 
Safety.  It  was  to  elect  Delegates  to  the  Continental 
Congress,  and  was  also  to  organize  a  Provincial  Con- 
gress to  take  the  place  of  the  old  Assembly.  Queens 
county,  being  under  tory  control,  refused  to  participate 
in  this  movement,  but  the  nine  other  counties  now 
within  the  limits  of  the  State  responded.  The  com- 
mittee met  in  New  York  on  April  28  and  reappointed 
the  former  Delegates  to  Congress,  adding  to  their  num- 
ber five  more  congenial  spirits:  Philip  Schuyler, 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  Lewis  Morris,  Francis  Lewis, 
and  George  Clinton. 

The  Provincial  Congress,  which  met  in  New  York  on 
May  22,  1775,  was  a  prudent  and  conservative  body  of 
eighty-one  members.  Gouverneur  Morris,  then  only 
twenty-three  years  of  age,  was  a  delegate  from  West- 
chester  county,  and  as  such  not  only  came  for  the  first 
time  into  public  prominence,  but  became  one  of  the 
leaders  of  the  body.  It  adopted  resolutions  favoring 
conciliation  and  continued  union  with  Great  Britain, 
disapproving  the  invasion  of  Canada,  and  looking  to 
the  Continental  Congress  for  leadership  and  direction 
on  all  important  matters.  As  yet,  it  must  be  remem- 
bered, the  fateful  word  "independence"  had  not  been 
spoken  at  Philadelphia.  On  the  contrary,  nearly  all 
the  continental  leaders  were  outspoken  in  their  declara- 
tions of  loyalty  to  the  crown.  One  other  incident  of  the 
first  session  of  the  New  York  Provincial  Congress  must 
be  recalled.  On  the  initiative  of  Morris  it  suggested  the 


1775-6]  COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  37 

issue  of  paper  currency  by  the  various  Colonies,  each 
Colony  being  responsible  for  the  redemption  in  gold 
of  all  that  it  issued,  but  the  entire  issue  to  be  guaranteed 
by  the  Continental  Congress.  That  was  the  origin  of 
the  Continental  currency. 

After  a  session  of  some  weeks,  the  Provincial  Con- 
gress adjourned,  and  a  new  body  of  like  character  was 
called  to  meet  in  the  fall.  On  the  appointed  day  in 
October  no  quorum  was  present,  and  it  was  not  until 
December  6  that  organization  could  be  effected.  Even 
then  the  tory  counties  of  Queens  and  Richmond  were 
unrepresented.  This  manifestation  of  hostility  enraged 
the  patriots  in  the  Provincial  Congress,  and  it  was  pro- 
posed to  take  harsh  measures,  comprising  imprison- 
ment or  exile,  against  the  tory  leaders,  beginning  with 
Governor  Tryon  himself.  To  avoid  such  fate  Tryon 
took  refuge  on  a  British  warship. 

That  winter  it  was  strongly  recommended  by  the 
Continental  Congress  at  Philadelphia  that  the  various 
Colonies  should  take  strenuous  steps  for  the  suppression 
of  toryism  and  all  disaffection,  a  recommendation 
perhaps  chiefly  suggested  by  the  conduct  of  the  tories 
of  Queens,  Richmond,  and  other  counties  of  New  York. 
Again,  on  May  15,  1776,  it  urged  the  Colonies  to  adopt 
new  and  permanent  State  governments,  doubtless  in  this 
also  having  New  York  especially  in  mind.  Meantime 
New  York  had  elected  a  new  Provincial  Congress  and 
had  elected  John  Jay  a  member  of  it,  although  he  was 
at  the  same  time  a  member  of  the  Continental  Congress. 
This  New  York  body  met  at  the  New  York  City  Hall 


38  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1776 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

on  May  14,  and  immediately  voted  Jay  leave  of  absence 
from  his  duties  at  Philadelphia  and  summoned  him  to 
New  York  to  advise  and  assist  in  its  deliberations.  It 
was  undoubtedly  well  for  New  York  that  Jay  was  sum- 
moned, although  he  was  thus  prevented  from  taking 
part  in  the  debate  upon  independence  and  from  being 
one  of  the  signers  of  the  Declaration. 

Jay  reached  New  York  on  May  25,  and  at  once 
became  by  common  consent  the  leader  of  the  Provincial 
Congress,  particularly  in  all  matters  relating  to  the 
Continental  Congress  and  its  doings.  It  was  on  his 
initiative  that  as  late  as  June  1 1  a  resolution  was 
adopted  declaring  it  to  be  the  sense  of  the  Provincial 
Congress  that  the  people  had  not  authorized  it  or  their 
Delegates  at  Philadelphia  to  declare  the  Colony  to  be 
independent  of  the  British  crown.  Jay  was  confirmed 
in  this  by  his  colleague,  Duane,  who  wrote  him  from 
Philadelphia  that  Patrick  Henry  and  the  other  Vir- 
ginians were  opposed  to  independence  and  that  it  was 
manifestly  desirable  to  await  a  more  definite  popular 
mandate  before  venturing  upon  so  radical  a  course. 
Nevertheless,  on  June  7  the  Continental  Congress  had 
begun  to  consider  the  question  of  a  declaration  of  inde- 
pendence, a  fact  of  which  Jay  was  probably  not  yet 
informed  on  June  11. 

Meantime  the  menace  of  British  occupation  of  New 
York  increased  and  the  patriots  took  all  possible 
measures  for  defense,  and  also  for  escape  in  case  defense 
proved  impossible.  The  Colonial  records  were  hastily 


1776]  COLONIAL  ANTECEDENTS  39 

sent  up  the  river  to  Kingston,  with  the  purpose  of  mak- 
ing that  place,  comparatively  secure  from  the  British 
fleet,  at  least  the  temporary  capital  of  the  Colony,  and 
the  Provincial  Congress — a  new  one,  elected  on  June 
19  and  not  yet  convened — prepared  to  follow  it  thither. 

That  body  did  not,  however,  immediately  proceed  to 
Kingston.  It  paused  for  a  time  at  White  Plains,  in 
Westchester  county,  and  there  organized  and  per- 
formed the  most  important  act  of  its  entire  career.  It 
was  on  July  9  that  it  met  in  the  White  Plains  court 
house.  Five  days  before,  the  Continental  Congress  had 
adopted  the  Declaration  of  Independence.  The  news 
of  that  epochal  achievement  had  been  hurried  across 
country  by  express  riders,  and  the  text  of  the  declaration 
had  been  read  at  New  York  and  at  Albany.  It  had  been 
received  with  manifestations  of  popular  approval  and 
exultation  so  general  and  so  emphatic  as  to  warrant  the 
belief  that  it  would  be  ratified  by  the  vast  majority  of 
the  people  of  the  Colony.  That  view  was  taken  of  it 
when,  on  the  afternoon  of  July  9,  it  was  laid  before  the 
Provincial  Congress  at  White  Plains. 

Every  eye  was  naturally  turned  toward  John  Jay,  to 
see  his  attitude  toward  the  momentous  instrument,  and 
then  by  unanimous  vote  the  Declaration  was  referred 
to  him,  or  to  a  committee  of  which  he  was  the  chairman, 
for  consideration.  An  hour  later  it  was  reported  back 
with  a  proposed  resolution  drafted  by  Jay,  unreservedly 
approving  the  Declaration  though  deploring  the  neces- 
sity for  it  and  authorizing  the  New  York  Delegates  at 
Philadelphia  to  sign  it  Thus  was  the  Colony  irre- 


40  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1776 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

vocably  committed  to  the  common  cause  of  union  and 
independence.  The  next  day,  July  10,  1776,  the  Pro- 
vincial Congress  changed  its  own  official  title  to  that  of 
"Convention  of  the  Representatives  of  the  STATE  OF 
NEW  YORK."  The  Empire  State  was  born. 


CHAPTER  II 
ORGANIZING  THE  STATE 

THE  State  of  New  York,  we  have  said,  was  born 
at  White  Plains  on  July  10,  1776.  That  was  not, 
however,  to  be  the  birth  date  of  record,  nor  was 
the  birthplace  to  be  the  permanent  seat  of  government. 
On  that  same  day  the  Convention  of  the  Representatives 
of  the  State  of  New  York  adopted  a  resolution  declaring 
that  the  sovereign  and  independent  State  of  New  York 
had  begun  its  existence  on  April  20,  1775,  that  being 
the  date  on  which  the  first  independent  Provincial  Con- 
vention, summoned  by  the  Committee  of  Sixty  without 
regard  to  the  British  Governor  and  composed  of  repre- 
sentatives of  nine  counties,  had  met  in  New  York  City 
and  elected  Delegates  to  the  Continental  Congress. 

This  adoption  of  a  date  was  entirely  logical,  despite 
its  somewhat  ex  post  facto  appearance.  So,  too,  with 
the  logic  of  events,  was  the  action  of  the  Convention  in 
choosing  its  place  of  meeting.  At  the  very  moment  of 
this  epochal  assembly  at  White  Plains,  British  ships  of 
war  were  lying  in  the  Hudson  River  at  Tarrytown,  only 
a  few  miles  away,  and  raiding  parties  landed  from  them 
were  threatening  White  Plains  with  capture.  The  city 
of  New  York,  however,  was  still  in  patriot  hands  and 
was  still  the  American  headquarters.  Washington 
himself,  with  his  ablest  aids,  had  come  thither  from 
Boston  in  mid-April  and  had  gathered  there  such  an 
army  as  he  could  to  resist  the  blow  which  the  British 

41 


42  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1776 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

were  obviously  preparing  to  deliver  at  that  strategic 
point.  For  Admiral  Howe  and  his  brother,  General 
Howe,  with  fleet  and  army,  were  in  the  Lower  Bay; 
Clinton  was  coming  up  to  join  them  from  his  ineffectual 
attack  upon  the  palmetto  fortifications  of  Charleston, 
Cornwallis  accompanying  him;  and  Carleton  was  pre- 
paring for  a  descent  from  the  north. 

In  these  circumstances,  both  prudence  and  courage 
prevailed.  The  archives  of  the  State  were  sent  up  the 
Hudson  to  Kingston,  and  preparations  were  made  to 
defend  the  river  against  the  penetration  of  any  British 
expedition  to  that  place;  but  the  Convention  itself 
resolved  to  remain  near  Washington  in  his  desperate 
endeavor  to  hold  his  ground  against  the  British  onset. 
It  therefore  continued  to  sit  in  the  White  Plains  court 
house  until  July  27,  when  it  adjourned  to  reassemble 
two  days  later  on  Manhattan  Island.  It  did  not,  it  is 
true,  go  down  to  New  York  City  proper,  but  halted  at 
Harlem,  and  there  for  just  a  month  held  its  sessions  in 
a  church. 

The  battle  of  Long  Island  was  fought  on  August  27, 
and  the  result  made  it  obviously  prudent  for  the  Con- 
vention to  retire  from  what  was  to  be  the  next  firing 
line.  Accordingly  on  August  29  it  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  Fishkill  on  September  5.  It  there  first  assembled  in 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  church,  but  found  that  build- 
ing unfit  for  occupancy,  being  "very  foul  with  the  dung 
of  doves  and  fowls,  without  any  benches,  seats,  or  other 
conveniences."  So  it  adopted  the  Dutch  church  as  its 
meeting  place.  On  September  7  it  took  a  recess  of  a 
week,  but  was  again  in  session  from  September  14  to 


1776]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  43 

October  5,  on  October  15,  on  December  5  and  6,  and  on 
February  11,  1777. 

On  this  last  date  it  resolved  to  follow  the  archives  to 
Kingston  and  to  make  that  place  the  seat  of  government. 
Accordingly  it  adjourned  at  Fishkill,  and  reassembled 
at  Kingston  on  March  6,  held  a  most  important  session 
for  more  than  two  months,  and  finally  adjourned  sine 
die  on  May  13,  to  be  succeeded  by  the  first  constitu- 
tional Legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York.  During 
all  this  period,  amid  the  vicissitudes  of  the  Convention, 
and  especially  during  its  various  recesses,  a  Committee 
of  Safety,  with  plenary  powers,  was  maintained.  It 
had  been  constituted  by  the  first  Provincial  Congress 
on  July  8,  1775,  and  it  continued  in  existence  until  the 
final  session  of  the  Convention  at  Kingston  in  March, 
1777.  Its  meetings  were  at  New  York  City  until 
August  20,  1776;  at  Harlem  on  August  27  and  28;  at 
Kingsbridge  on  August  30;  at  Philipse's  Manor,  near 
Tarrytown,  on  August  31;  at  Fishkill  until  February 
15,  1777;  and  at  Kingston  until  March  5,  when  it  sur- 
rendered its  stewardship  to  the  Convention. 

It  was  in  such  difficult  and  hazardous  circumstances 
as  these  that  the  first  Constitution  of  the  State  of  New 
York  was  framed.  The  Convention  itself  wisely  did  not 
undertake  the  task.  At  that  memorable  session  of  July 
10,  1776,  in  the  little  old  White  Plains  court  house,  it 
provided  a  tentative  system  of  jurisprudence  by  for- 
mally declaring  that  until  further  notice  the  common 
law  and  statutes  of  England,  just  as  they  had  been  in 
force  in  the  Colony  on  April  19,  1775 — the  day  before 
the  date  assigned  as  the  beginning  of  the  new  order  of 


44  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1776 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

affairs — should  be  in  full  force  and  effect  in  the  State 
of  New  York.  Nothing  more  was  done  until  August 
1.  At  that  time,  in  session  in  the  church  at  Harlem,  the 
Convention  appointed  a  special  committee  to  prepare  a 
draft  of  a  permanent  Constitution  for  the  new  State. 

This  committee  was  appointed  on  the  motion  of 
Gouverneur  Morris,  seconded  by  William  Duer.  Con- 
trary to  common  practice,  however,  the  maker  of  the 
motion  was  not  designated  as  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, though  he  was  a  member  of  it.  For  the  chair- 
manship John  Jay  was  selected,  doubtless  the  best 
choice  that  could  possibly  have  been  made.  The  other 
members,  who  among  them  represented  the  principal 
shades  of  political  thought  and  also  the  chief  political 
influences,  were  Gouverneur  Morris,  William  Duer, 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  Abraham  Yates,  Robert  Yates, 
John  Morin  Scott,  Colonel  John  Broome,  John  Sloss 
Hobart,  Colonel  Charles  DeWitt,  Samuel  Townsend, 
William  Smith,  and  Henry  Wisner.  The  most  radical 
tendencies  in  New  York  politics  and  policies  were 
represented  with  masterful  ability  by  John  Morin 
Scott,  while  Morris,  Livingston,  and  the  Yateses  were 
the  pillars  of  conservatism. 

John  Jay,  however,  was  the  real  Constitution  maker. 
He  was  not  merely  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  he 
was  the  committee.  He  was  at  that  time  thirty-one 
years  of  age,  already  recognized  as  one  of  the  ablest 
lawyers  in  New  York,  the  author  of  that  address  of  the 
Continental  Congress  to  the  people  of  Great  Britain 
which  Thomas  Jefferson,  before  he  knew  who  had 
written  it,  declared  to  be  "a  production  of  the  finest  pen 


1776]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  45 

in  America."  He  came  of  a  French  family  belonging 
to  the  commonalty  rather  than  to  the  aristocracy,  but 
allied  through  marriages  with  several  of  the  most  aris- 
tocratic and  influential  families  of  New  York.  He  was 
thus  neither  conservative  nor  radical,  but  combined  the 
desirable  characteristics  of  both,  together  with  an 
intellectual  power,  a  purity  of  character,  and  a  chivalric 
fervor  of  devotion  which  placed  him  in  the  very  fore- 
most rank  of  the  founders  not  merely  of  the  State  of 
New  York  but  no  less  of  the  United  States  of  America. 
It  was  on  August  1  that  the  committee  was  appointed. 
The  Convention  ordered  it  to  report  the  draft  of  Con- 
stitution in  a  fortnight,  which  was  absurdly  impossible. 
Jay  was  not  even  present  in  the  Convention  at  that  time, 
but  was  up  in  the  Highlands  of  the  Hudson  assisting 
George  Clinton  to  construct  defenses  to  prevent  the 
British  from  going  up  the  river,  seizing  Kingston,  and 
cutting  the  United  States  into  two  parts.  There  was  no 
time  for  Constitution-making  when  a  storm  was  about 
to  break  which  might  leave  no  State  for  which  a  Con- 
stitution would  be  needed.  Moreover,  a  few  weeks 
later  Jay,  Duer,  and  five  others  were  appointed  a  com- 
mittee "for  inquiring  into,  detecting,  and  defeating 
conspiracies  against  the  liberties  of  America."  There 
was  much  need  of  such  a  committee,  and  it  had  much 
work  to  do.  More  than  any  other  of  the  States,  New 
York  contained  many  British  loyalists  and  many  who 
were  actively  conspiring,  intriguing,  and  otherwise 
working  for  British  success.  Jay  and  his  colleagues 
were  invested  with  plenary  power  to  take  summary 
action  against  all  such,  and  with  those  duties  they  were 


46  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

occupied  much  of  the  time  until  the  end  of  February, 
1777,  when  the  committee  was  replaced  by  a  commis- 
sion. 

As  promptly  as  possible  upon  his  release  from  these 
uncongenial  duties,  in  the  performance  of  which  his 
transcendent  abilities  were  not  employed  to  the  most 
profitable  advantage,  Jay  addressed  himself  to  the  work 
of  drafting  the  Constitution.  He  had  among  his  col- 
leagues on  the  committee  men  of  high  ability,  who 
might  have  rendered  effective  cooperation,  but  he  pre- 
ferred to  do  the  major  part  of  the  work  alone.  For  that 
purpose  he  withdrew  from  the  Convention,  and  indeed 
from  all  contact  or  communication  with  his  colleagues, 
and  in  some  sequestered  retreat  in  the  country  devoted 
his  undivided  and  undisturbed  attention  to  the  task. 

Concerning  his  execution  of  that  task  some  erroneous 
notions  have  prevailed.  It  has  been  said  that  he  under- 
took the  work  "in  an  almost  unexplored  field."  That  is 
only  in  part  true.  If  there  were  no  other  American 
State  Constitutions  before  him  for  him  to  study,  to 
imitate,  or  to  improve  upon,  there  were  the  British  and 
Colonial  systems,  and  perhaps  also  some  other  Euro- 
pean systems,  especially  that  of  the  Netherlands,  from 
which  it  is  unquestionable  that  he  derived  many  of  his 
ideas.  It  has  also  been  said — by  John  Adams,  on  the 
authority  of  James  Duane — that  he  used  as  his  model 
and  foundation  a  letter  which  Adams  had  written  to 
George  Wythe,  prescribing  a  scheme  of  State  consti- 
tutional government.  It  is  probable  that  Jay  did  see 
that  letter,  but  it  is  quite  certain  that  it  contained  only  a 
few  rudimentary  suggestions  of  the  most  obvious  kind. 


1777]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  47 

The  fact  doubtless  is  that  Jay  used  as  the  basis  of  his 
draft  the  system  of  government  which  had  prevailed 
in  New  York  while  it  was  a  Province  or  a  Colony  of  the 
British  crown,  deriving  also  some  hints  and  suggestions 
from  English  and  Dutch  sources,  and  modifying  and 
adapting  their  principles  according  to  the  lessons  of 
experience  and  to  what  he  conceived  to  be  the  needs  of 
the  new  State.  "We  have,"  he  wrote,  "a  government 
to  form,  and  God  knows  what  it  will  resemble.  Our 
politicians,  like  some  guests  at  a  feast,  are  perplexed  and 
undetermined  which  dish  to  prefer."  He  was  himself 
much  more  conservative  than  he  conceived  the  majority 
of  the  Convention  to  be.  Indeed,  the  Convention 
seemed  to  him  to  be  ultra-democratic.  For  this  reason 
he  did  not  deem  it  prudent  to  put  into  the  draft  of  the 
Constitution  some  provisions  which  seemed  to  him 
desirable;  but  he  held  them  in  reserve,  to  be  offered  as 
amendments  in  the  Convention  if  the  temper  of  that 
body  should  indicate  a  possibility  of  their  acceptance 
of  them. 

It  was  on  February  27,  1777,  that  Jay  was  relieved  of 
his  labors  as  a  tory-catcher  by  the  dissolution  of  the 
committee,  and  he  at  once  began  work  on  the  Consti- 
tution. It  was  almost  exactly  a  month  later  that  Duer 
reported  the  draft  of  that  instrument  from  the  com- 
mittee to  the  Convention.  The  draft  was  entirely  in 
Jay's  handwriting.  It  was  forthwith  taken  up  by  the 
Convention  section  by  section,  and  was  carefully  con- 
sidered and  debated  at  great  length.  Only  a  few 
changes  were  made  in  it,  and  of  these  nearly  all  were 
proposed  by  Jay  himself.  It  was  an  interesting  circum- 


48  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

stance  that  the  two  members  of  the  Convention  who 
most  strongly  disagreed  on  the  most  strongly  debated 
points  were  its  two  ablest  and  most  distinguished  mem- 
bers and  two  close  friends  and  neighbors,  John  Jay  and 
Gouverneur  Morris. 

The  Constitution  provided  for  a  government  con- 
sisting of  three  coordinate  branches,  namely,  the  Legis- 
lative, the  Executive,  and  the  Judicial.  This  system 
had  been  suggested  by  Adams  to  Wythe  in  the  letter 
already  referred  to,  but  it  would  be  an  untenable  propo- 
sition that  it  there  had  its  origin  and  that  it  was  from 
that  source  that  Jay  derived  it:  the  principle  had  long 
been  familiar  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  race.  It  was  provided 
that  the  legislative  branch  should  consist  of  two  cham- 
bers, a  plan  obviously  modeled  after  the  English  Par- 
liament, and  perhaps  also  after  the  former  Provincial 
Legislature;  for  while  the  latter  had  consisted  of  a 
single  house,  there  was  a  Council  exercising  the  func- 
tions of  an  upper  house.  The  provisions  that  each  house 
should  be  the  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  its  own 
members,  and  that  the  lower  house  should  choose  its 
own  Speaker,  were  also  familiar  principles  of  Colonial 
and  British  legislative  organization.  The  composition 
of  the  two  houses  likewise  followed  established  lines. 
The  Senate  was  to  consist  of  twenty-four  members, 
chosen  from  four  great  districts  into  which  the  State 
should  be  divided:  three  from  the  Eastern,  nine  from 
the  Southern,  six  from  the  Middle,  and  six  from  the 
Western.  They  were  to  serve  for  four  years,  and  one- 
fourth  were  to  be  elected  every  year.  The  Assembly 


JOHN  JAY 

John  Jay,  2d  governor  1795-1801  and  chief  justice  of  the 
United  States;  born  in  New  York  City,  December  12,  1745; 
delegate  to  continental  congress,  1774;  member  2d  constitu- 
tional congress,  1775;  delegate  to  New  York  provincial  con- 
gress, 1776;  drafted  first  state  constitution;  United  States 
minister  to  Great  Britain,  1794;  in  Paris  with  Benjamin 
Franklin,  1782-84;  chief  justice  United  States,  1789,  1800; 
elected  governor,  1795;  reelected  1798;  retired  1801;  died  May 
17,  1829  in  Bedford,  Westchester  county,  N.  Y. 


EGBERT  BENSOX 

Egbert  Benson,  jurist;  born  in  New  York  City,  June  21, 
1746;  lawver;  member  of  revolutionary  committee  of  safety; 
in  1777  member  of  council  of  safety,  and  appointed  first  attorney 
general  of  the  state;  member  of  assembly,  1777-1781;  con- 
tinental congress,  1781,  1784,  1787,  1788;  congress,  1789-1793; 
judge  of  supreme  court,  1794-1801;  judge  of  United  States 
circuit  court,  1801;  again  elected  to  congress  and  served  from 
March  4,  1813,  until  August  2,  1813,  when  he  resigned;  first 
president  of  New  York  Historical  Society;  died  at  Jamaica, 
L.  I.,  August  24,  1833. 


1777]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  49 

was  to  contain  seventy  members,  apportioned  among 
the  counties  according  to  population,  and  elected  for 
one  year  each. 

The  legislative  franchise  was  restricted.  True,  the 
Constitution  declared  in  its  preamble  that  all  power 
whatever  in  the  State  had  reverted  to  the  people  thereof, 
and  it  might  therefore  have  been  supposed  that  there 
should  be  universal  suffrage.  But  Jay  held  that  the 
State  should  be  governed  by  those  who  owned  it;  to-wit, 
those  who  owned  the  real  estate.  Therefore  he  pre- 
scribed in  the  Constitution  that  the  right  to  vote  for 
members  of  the  Assembly  should  be  exercised  only  by 
male  citizens  twenty-one  years  of  age,  paying  taxes,  and 
possessed  of  freeholds  worth  twenty  pounds  or  holding 
tenancies  worth  forty  shillings  a  year.  In  order  to  vote 
for  Senators,  and  also  for  Governor,  a  man  must  have  a 
freehold  worth  a  hundred  pounds  above  all  indebted- 
ness. We  need  not  be  surprised  at  the  acceptance  by  the 
"ultra-democratic"  Convention  of  these  restrictions, 
which  in  our  day  would  be  condemned  as  intolerably 
aristocratic,  when  we  remember  that  at  that  time  New 
York  had  fully  40,000  citizens  entitled  to  vote  under 
these  conditions,  a  much  larger  proportion  than  that  in 
England  at  that  time  or  at  any  time  down  to  the  Reform 
act.  It  does  not  appear  that  there  was  any  considerable 
demand  in  New  York  for  a  more  extended  franchise, 
nor  was  the  principle  of  indiscriminate  and  universal 
democracy  anywhere  seriously  advocated. 

The  executive  authority  was  to  be  wielded  by  a  Gov- 
ernor, and  in  order  that  the  principle  of  popular  author- 
ity might  be  maintained  it  was  provided  that  he  should 


SO  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

be  elected  by  direct  vote  of  the  citizens  who  were  qual- 
ified to  vote  for  State  Senators.  A  Lieutenant-Governor 
was  to  be  similarly  and  simultaneously  elected,  who  was 
to  be  the  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate  and  was  to 
succeed  the  Governor  in  case  of  his  death  or  disability. 
It  was  over  the  Governorship,  its  powers  and  limita- 
tions, that  Jay  was  most  troubled  with  uncertainties  and 
fears,  and  it  was  in  his — and  the  convention's — dealings 
with  that  office  that  the  chief  errors  were  committed. 
Morris,  with  clearer  vision  and  more  courage  than  Jay, 
was  for  making  the  Governor  a  real  Chief  Executive, 
with  a  veto  power  over  legislation  and  with  the  power  to 
appoint  subordinate  officers.  But  Jay  seems  to  have 
been  obsessed  by  memories  of  the  abuses  committed  by 
autocratic  royal  Colonial  Governors  and  by  a  fear  that 
a  Governor  though  chosen  by  the  people  would  follow 
their  example. 

This  apprehension  was  intensified  by  the  circum- 
stance that  it  was  intended  to  have  a  large  and  important 
array  of  appointed  officers.  These  were  to  include 
Mayors  of  cities,  Sheriffs  of  counties,  District  Attor- 
neys, and  Coroners,  as  well  as  many  State  functionaries. 
Indeed,  practically  all  officers  were  to  be  appointed, 
excepting  of  course  the  Legislature,  the  Governor  and 
Lieutenant-Governor,  the  State  Treasurer,  and  town 
officers.  Obviously,  the  power  which  had  the  appoint- 
ment of  all  these  would  exercise  enormous  influence. 
There  were  divided  counsels  in  the  committee  and  in 
the  Convention.  Some  were  for  giving  the  Governor 
the  absolute  appointing  power.  Others  more  cautiously 
advocated  a  requirement  that  his  appointments 


1777]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  51 

should  be  passed  upon,  for  confirmation  or  rejection, 
by  the  Legislature  or  by  the  Senate.  Jay,  however, 
devised  and  readily  led  the  Convention  to  adopt  a  dif- 
ferent plan  from  either  of  these;  though  in  fact  it  was 
not  made  to  work  as  he  intended  it.  A  Council  of 
Appointment  was  to  be  constituted,  consisting  of  four 
Senators,  one  from  each  of  the  districts,  elected  by  the 
Assembly,  with  the  Governor  ex-officio  its  presiding 
officer.  The  Governor  was,  however,  to  have  no  vote, 
save  the  deciding  vote  in  case  of  a  tie.  To  this  Council 
was  to  be  given  full  power  of  appointment.  It  was  Jay's 
intention  that  the  Governor  should  nominate  all  the 
officers,  and  the  Senatorial  members  of  the  Council 
should  act  upon  them  for  confirmation  or  rejection. 
But  in  fact  the  nominations  were  made  by  the  Council, 
which  thus  became  at  once  a  cumbrous  and  unsatisfac- 
tory arm  of  the  government,  and  a  peculiarly  odious 
political  machine.  Bad  as  the  system  was,  it  was  toler- 
ated by  the  State  for  more  than  forty  years. 

A  similar  controversy  arose  and  a  similar  blunder 
was  made  over  the  matter  of  the  veto  power.  Despite 
the  limited  suffrage  for  members  of  the  Legislature, 
there  was  a  haunting  fear  of  bad  laws,  and  at  the  same 
time  there  was  a  disinclination  to  entrust  the  Governor 
with  the  veto  power.  Morris  did,  indeed,  urge  that  the 
Governor  should  have  such  power,  but  again  Jay  dis- 
agreed with  him,  and,  perhaps  following  the  example 
of  the  Privy  Council  in  Great  Britain,  proposed  a 
Council  of  Revision,  which  the  Convention  adopted. 
This  was  a  Council  composed  of  the  Governor,  the 
Chancellor,  and  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and 


52  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

to  it  were  to  be  submitted  all  bills  passed  by  the  Legis- 
lature, before  they  became  laws.  If  the  Council  failed 
to  take  any  action  upon  a  bill  within  ten  days,  it  became 
law;  while  if  the  Council  disapproved  a  bill,  it  might 
still  become  law  through  repassage  by  a  two-thirds 
vote  of  each  house.  This  Council  was  far  less  objection- 
able than  the  other.  In  fact,  it  served  the  State  on  the 
whole  quite  satisfactorily.  But  it  too  was  abolished 
after  more  than  forty  years. 

With  these  limitations  the  Governor,  who  was 
required  to  be  a  freeholder,  was  to  hold  office  for  three 
years  and  to  exercise  powers  similar  to  those  of  the 
Colonial  Governors  who  had  preceded  him.  He  was 
to  be  commander-in-chief  of  the  army  and  navy.  He 
was  to  have  authority  to  call  the  Legislature  together  in 
special  session,  and  to  prorogue  it  for  not  more  than 
sixty  days  in  a  year;  and  he  was  to  deliver  a  message  to 
it  at  the  beginning  of  each  session.  He  was  to  have  the 
power  to  grant  reprieves  and  pardons  to  convicted  per- 
sons, save  murderers  and  traitors,  in  whose  cases  he 
could  merely  suspend  execution  of  the  sentence  until  the 
Legislature  had  opportunity  to  act. 

The  third  branch  of  State  government,  the  judiciary, 
was  of  all  most  strangely  treated  in  the  Constitution. 
No  general  system  of  courts  was  provided.  Indeed,  the 
only  court  actually  prescribed  was  that  of  Errors  and 
Impeachment,  which  was  to  consist  of  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  the  Senate,  and  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  forming  a  tribunal  modeled  in  part  after  the 
British  House  of  Lords  and  partly,  probably  much 
more,  after  the  former  Colonial  Council.  All  other 


1777]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  S3 

courts,  of  original  jurisdiction,  were  simply  recognized 
as  being  already  in  existence.  The  Supreme  Court 
itself  had  only  incidental  mention,  in  a  clause  prescrib- 
ing the  tenure  of  office  of  its  Justices.  Trial  by  jury  was 
to  be  maintained  in  all  cases  in  which  it  had  been  guar- 
anteed in  the  Colony,  and  land  grants,  charters,  popular 
rights,  legal  customs,  and  practically  the  whole  code  of 
civil  laws  were  similarly  carried  over  from  the  Colony 
to  the  State,  at  least  so  far  as  they  were  compatible  with 
independence  of  the  crown. 

It  was  on  March  12,  1777,  that  William  Duer 
reported  Jay's  holograph  of  the  Constitution  to  the 
Convention,  and  immediately  debate  upon  it  began  in 
committee  of  the  whole.  The  first  section  was  adopted 
in  a  few  hours,  but  others  were  discussed  at  great  length. 
A  passage  providing  for  voting  by  ballot  at  all  elections 
was  denounced  and  was  ultimately  rejected  on  motion 
of  Gouverneur  Morris;  though  Jay  secured  the  adop- 
tion of  an  amendment  providing  for  the  use  of  ballots 
as  soon  as  might  be  practicable  after  the  war.  It  was 
recognized  that  this  would  be  merely  experimental, 
and  a  clause  was  added  empowering  the  Legislature  at 
any  time  after  giving  the  ballot  a  fair  trial  to  order  the 
resumption  of  oral  and  public  voting.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  however,  a  secret  ballot  law  was  enacted  the  very 
next  year  and  was  nine  years  later  made  compulsory  in 
all  elections  of  all  State  officers;  and  it  was  never 
repealed. 

The  greatest  debate  of  all,  probably,  was  over  the 
question  of  religious  liberty  and  equality.  This  at  first 
may  seem  strange,  seeing  that  New  York  had  been  one 


54  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

of  the  most  tolerant  of  all  the  Colonies  and  was  one  of 
the  few  which  had  not  practiced  persecution.  Tolera- 
tion had  been  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  Dutch 
founders  of  New  Netherland,  and  it  had  been  pre- 
served by  their  successors  with  jealous  care.  Jay  him- 
self was  strongly  attached  to  it,  and  was  glad  to  write 
in  his  draft  a  clause  guaranteeing  "the  free  toleration  of 
religious  profession  and  worship  without  diminution 
or  preference."  But  Jay's  ancestral  traditions  of 
La  Rochelle  and  the  Huguenots  moved  him  also  to  be 
most  wary  lest  alien  political  influence  should  creep  in 
under  the  guise  of  faith.  He  strove  to  secure  the  adop- 
tion of  an  amendment  not,  indeed,  to  abridge  or  inter- 
fere with  freedom  of  faith  and  worship,  but  to  withhold 
citizenship  from  and  deny  naturalization  to  all  who 
would  not  specifically  abjure  the  authority  of  any  for- 
eign ecclesiastic  to  absolve  citizens  from  their  allegi- 
ance. In  this  he  did  not  wholly  succeed,  but  he  did 
secure  provisions  that  liberty  of  conscience  should  not 
be  so  construed  as  to  justify  acts  of  licentiousness  or 
practices  inconsistent  with  the  safety  of  the  State;  and 
that  before  being  naturalized  aliens  should  abjure  all 
foreign  allegiance  "in  matters  ecclesiastical  as  well  as 
civil."  It  was  not  that  he  opposed  religious  liberty, 
but  that  he  wished  to  protect  the  State  against  ecclesias- 
tical intrigue. 

One  other  important  amendment  was  urged  by  Jay 
and  Morris,  but  unhappily  failed.  This  was  for  the 
abolition  and  prohibition  of  human  slavery,  and  to 
it  the  two  great  statesmen  were  most  earnestly  devoted. 
Its  adoption  would  have  been  of  the  greatest  possible 


1777]  ORGANIZING  THE  STATE  55 

importance  to  the  whole  nation,  and  might  well  have 
caused  the  universal  abolition  of  slavery  at  an  early 
date.  Had  Jay  been  able  to  remain  in  the  Convention 
to  the  end,  he  might  have  secured  its  acceptance.  But 
at  the  critical  moment  he  was  called  away  by  the  death 
of  his  mother,  which  occurred  on  April  17,  and  in  his 
absence  Morris  was  unable  to  sway  the  Convention  in 
favor  of  freedom;  and  the  amendment,  after  having 
once  been  approved,  was  finally  omitted. 

By  this  time  the  Convention  was  growing  weary  of 
debate  upon  the  Constitution.  Jay's  absence  dispirited 
his  friends,  who  lacked  his  commanding  leadership.  It 
also  prompted  his  opponents  to  hasten  matters  before 
he  should  return.  Accordingly,  on  Sunday,  April  20, 
at  the  very  moment  when  the  absent  leader  was  attend- 
ing the  funeral  of  his  mother,  at  Fishkill,  the  Constitu- 
tion was  pushed  to  a  final  vote  and  was  all  but  unani- 
mously adopted.  Two  days  later  it  was  published  and 
promulgated  by  being  read  aloud  from  an  improvised 
platform,  consisting  of  an  up-ended  cask,  in  front  of 
the  Kingston  court  house.  It  was  never  submitted  to 
the  people  for  their  ratification,  the  Convention  assum- 
ing that  in  electing  members  of  the  Convention  for  the 
purpose  of  preparing  a  Constitution,  the  people  prac- 
tically ratified  in  advance  whatever  instrument  that 
body  might  adopt.  It  may  be  added  that  in  this  respect 
the  example  of  New  York  was  followed  by  nearly  all 
the  other  States,  Massachusetts  alone  submitting  its 
Constitution  to  a  popular  vote. 

On  the  whole,  we  must  esteem  the  first  Constitution 
of  New  York  to  have  been,  despite  some  errors,  an 


56  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

exceptionally  wise  and  worthy  instrument.  It  was 
pretty  generally  thus  regarded  in  the  other  States  as  its 
contents  became  known.  Jay  himself  wrote  that  it  was 
approved  "even  in  New  England,"  where  few  New 
York  productions  had  been  received  with  favor. 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR 

POLITICAL  parties  in  the  present  sense  of  the 
term  had  not  at  the  time  of  which  we  are  writing 
yet  come  into  organized  existence.  There  was  of 
course  a  strong  division  of  the  people  between  Ameri- 
can patriots  and  British  loyalists.  The  former,  who 
were  all  with  whom  we  need  now  concern  ourselves, 
were  vaguely  subdivided  more  on  social  than  political 
lines.  There  were  aristocrats,  or  conservatives,  and  it 
was  chiefly  on  these  lines,  in  addition  to  those  of  per- 
sonal and  family  influence,  that  the  electorate  was 
divided  in  the  contest  for  the  first  Governor  of  the  State 
of  New  York. 

There  were  four  candidates.  One  of  them,  doubtless 
the  fittest  of  all,  was  John  Jay.  He  was  a  candidate 
against  his  will,  never  acknowledging  his  candidacy 
but  trying  sincerely  to  rule  himself  out  by  throwing 
all  his  influence  in  behalf  of  another.  Had  he  sought 
election  he  would  probably  have  won.  That  he  did  not 
was,  however,  a  fortunate  circumstance,  since  he  was 
thus  left  free  to  devote  his  invaluable  services  to  the 
Nation  instead  of  merely  to  a  State. 

Another  was  Philip  Schuyler,  a  curious  compound 
of  aristocrat  and  democrat.  In  the  Provincial  Assembly 
of  1768  he  had  been  the  foremost  champion  of  the 
people.  When  in  1775  that  body  showed  itself  defiant 
of  the  popular  will,  and  refused  to  cooperate  with  the 

57 


58  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Continental  Congress,  he  took  the  lead  in  organizing 
the  Provincial  Congress  to  replace  it.  He  was  a  man  of 
military  talent — it  was  through  his  strategy  and 
Arnold's  impetuous  valor  that  Burgoyne  was  defeated 
and  captured  at  Saratoga,  though  the  weakling  Gates 
claimed  the  credit  of  the  victory, — and  of  still  greater 
civic  gifts.  His  intellect  was  masterful,  his  energy  was 
untiring,  his  integrity  was  spotless,  his  devotion  to  the 
public  welfare  was  unsurpassed.  Yet  he  was  character- 
ized by  a  sort  of  semi-aristocratic,  semi-military 
austerity,  not  to  say  arrogance,  which  held  him  aloof 
from  the  common  people  to  whose  interest  he  was  in 
fact  devoted,  and  denied  him  their  affection  while  he 
fully  commanded  their  respect  and  gratitude.  He  was 
for  them  but  not  of  them. 

A  third  candidate  was  John  Morin  Scott,  another 
curious  compound  of  aristocrat  and  democrat.  He  was 
a  man  of  aristocratic  Scottish  ancestry,  of  great  wealth, 
and  of  luxurious  domestic  life.  His  home  was  one  of 
the  most  richly  furnished  in  all  the  metropolitan  region. 
By  profession  he  was  a  lawyer,  and  from  that  calling  he 
derived  a  large  income.  Yet  he  was  essentially  a  radical 
agitator  of  the  extremest  type,  and  was  inclined  to  make 
his  appeal  to  the  democracy  against  the  aristocracy.  He 
had  served  in  the  Continental  Congress  in  1775  and  in 
the  New  York  Provincial  Congress  of  1776,  and  was  a 
brigadier-general  in  the  battle  of  Long  Island.  He  had 
been  a  member  of  Jay's  committee  which  drafted  the 
State  Constitution. 

George  Clinton  was  the  fourth  candidate.  He  was  a 
thorough  democrat  in  spirit,  though  of  aristocratic 


1777]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  59 

antecedents  and  of  autocratic  disposition.  He  came  of 
a  family  which  had  been  exiled  by  Cromwell  for  its 
adherence  to  the  Stuart  cause,  but  had  afterward  been 
permitted  to  live  in  seclusion  in  the  north  of  Ireland. 
Thence  it  migrated  to  the  Hudson  Valley,  where,  at 
Little  Britain,  Ulster  county,  George  Clinton  was  born 
on  July  26,  1739.  He  was  almost  as  precocious  as  was 
his  greater  opponent,  Hamilton.  As  a  boy  of  fifteen  he 
held  command  on  an  American  privateer;  at  sixteen  he 
was  a  lieutenant  at  the  conquest  of  Fort  Frontenac;  at 
twenty-six  he  was  Schuyler's  chief  rival  for  the  leader- 
ship of  the  Provincial  Congress.  In  1776  he  was  a 
member  of  the  Continental  Congress  and  voted  for  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  but  was  deprived  of  the 
privilege  of  signing  that  document  through  being  called 
away  for  military  duty  before  the  engrossed  copy  was 
ready  for  signature,  serving  as  a  brigadier-general.  He 
had  to  the  full  the  characteristic  temperament  of  an 
Irishman:  generous  and  sympathetic,  yet  pugnacious 
and  domineering;  a  loyal  friend  and  a  bitter  foe;  a 
brave  soldier  and  a  consummate  politician. 

Such  were  the  candidates  for  the  first  Governorship. 
There  was  little  preliminary  campaign  for  the  election. 
People  were  too  busy  with  the  war  for  speech-making 
or  parading.  Scott  made  some  effort,  personal  and 
epistolary,  in  his  own  behalf.  Jay  wrote  a  widely  cir- 
culated letter  urging  the  election  of  Schuyler  as  Gov- 
ernor and  Clinton  as  Lieutenant-Governor.  Clinton 
put  himself  forward  and  was  pushed  by  his  friends  for 
the  Governorship,  and  was  thus  a  candidate  for  both 
offices. 


60  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  election  was  held  in  June,  1777.  Jay's  letter  had 
the  effect  of  securing  the  aristocratic  and  conservative 
vote  almost  solidly  for  Schuyler  for  Governor  and 
Clinton  for  Lieutenant-Governor.  The  democratic  and 
radical  vote  was  chiefly  divided  between  Clinton  and 
Scott  in  the  ratio  of  nearly  two  to  one  in  favor  of  the 
former.  A  large  vote  was  cast  for  Jay  in  spite  of  his 
unwillingness  to  receive  it,  and  some  ballots  were  cast 
for  Philip  Livingston  and  for  Robert  R.  Livingston. 
Many  days  elapsed  before  the  result  was  known,  and 
then  it  was  found  that  George  Clinton  had  been  elected 
to  both  offices;  to  the  Governorship  through  the  heavy 
vote  of  the  southern  counties  in  his  favor  and  also,  prob- 
ably, through  the  diversion  of  some  conservative  votes 
from  Schuyler  to  Jay,  and  to  the  Lieutenant-Governor- 
ship through  the  absence  of  any  formidable  competing 
candidate.  He  of  course  elected  to  accept  the  Gover- 
norship, and  the  Lieutenant-Governorship  consequently 
remained  vacant  until  the  Legislature  met  and  on 
September  1  chose  Pierre  Van  Cortlandt  for  that  office. 

This  result  was  not  well  received  by  Schuyler.  The 
early  reports  of  the  polling  had  indicated  his  election, 
and  indeed  Jay  had  written  him  congratulating  him 
upon  his  apparent  success.  When  complete  returns 
reversed  this  showing  he  could  not  conceal  his  disap- 
pointment and  even  his  resentment.  He  attributed 
Clinton's  victory  to  his  exercise  of  the  arts  of  a  politi- 
cian, and  declared  that  his  antecedents  did  not  entitle 
him  to  such  distinction ;  an  opinion  in  which  we  can 
scarcely  agree  with  him,  seeing  what  Clinton's  activities 
had  been.  Nevertheless,  Schuyler  was  too  large  a  man 


1777]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  61 

to  let  personal  pique  affect  his  public  policy.  He 
ungrudgingly  recognized  Clinton's  integrity  and 
patriotism,  his  ability  and  courage,  and  invoked  for  him 
and  his  administration  the  undivided  and  cordial  sup- 
port of  the  State.  Then  he  turned  his  attention  to 
meeting  the  British  invasion  at  the  north,  organizing 
against  Burgoyne  the  campaign  of  which  Gates  was  to 
claim  the  credit. 

The  result  of  the  election  was  finally  announced  on 
July  9,  and  on  July  30  came  the  formal  inauguration  of 
the  Governor.  The  place  was  at  the  front  of  the  court 
house  at  Kingston,  which  served  as  the  first  Capitol  of 
the  State.  The  stage  was  an  up-turned  cask,  the  same 
from  which  in  the  preceding  April  the  Constitution  of 
the  State  had  been  proclaimed.  Standing  upon  that 
insecure  and  humble  pedestal,  clad  in  the  uniform  of  a 
brigadier-general  of  militia,  and  holding  his  drawn 
sword  in  his  upraised  hand,  George  Clinton  took  oath 
of  office  as  the  first  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
That  same  day  the  Council  of  Safety  proclaimed  him  to 
be  "Governor-General  and  Commander-in-Chief  of  all 
the  Militia,  and  Admiral  of  the  Navy  of  the  State,  to 
whom  the  good  people  of  this  State  are  to  pay  due 
obedience  according  to  the  laws  and  Constitution 
thereof." 

Already  on  July  16  the  Council  of  Safety  had  issued 
a  summons  convening  the  Legislature  at  Kingston  on 
August  1.  The  disturbed  condition  of  the  State,  how- 
ever, due  to  British  invasions  at  the  north,  west,  and 
south,  made  it  impracticable  for  the  members  to  meet  at 
that  time.  Most  of  them  were  either  actively  engaged 


62  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

with  the  militia  in  the  field  or  as  actively  looking  for  the 
protection  of  their  families  and  property  from  the 
menaces  of  war.  Clinton  waited  until  August  and  then 
prorogued  the  meeting  to  August  20.  Two  days  before 
that  date  it  was  evident  that  there  could  be  no  meeting 
of  a  quorum  of  either  house,  and  a  second  prorogation 
was  made  to  September  1.  On  this  date  a  few  members 
of  each  house  were  present,  but  not  a  quorum,  where- 
fore the  usual  custom  was  practiced,  of  meeting  daily 
and  immediately  adjourning  until  such  time  as  a  quo- 
rum could  be  secured.  At  last,  on  September  9,  a 
quorum  appeared  in  the  Senate,  and  the  next  day  one 
was  secured  in  the  Assembly. 

It  was  on  the  afternoon  of  September  10,  1777,  then, 
in  the  little  court  house  at  Kingston,  that  the  Legislature 
of  the  State  of  New  York  began  its  work.  Adopting  the 
custom  of  the  British  Parliament,  which  later  was 
adopted  by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  the 
two  houses  met  in  joint  session  to  listen  to  an  address 
from  the  Governor,  after  the  fashion  of  the  speech  from 
the  throne.  Clinton  referred  to  the  British  invasions 
and  the  consequent  delay  in  organizing  the  government; 
to  the  success  of  Schuyler  and  Herkimer  against  the 
British  at  the  west;  to  the  victory  at  Bennington,  Ver- 
mont, a  region  then  regarded  as  part  of  New  York;  and 
to  the  strengthening  of  Gates's  army  at  the  north  and  of 
the  defenses  of  the  Hudson  at  the  south.  He  recom- 
mended speedy  revision  of  the  militia  laws  to  meet 
existing  conditions;  revision  of  the  fiscal  system  to 
provide  for  a  necessary  revenue  and  sinking  fund 
against  the  debt  already  incurred ;  and  the  enactment  of 


1777]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  63 

an  election  law.  Finally  he  urged  scrupulous  observ- 
ance of  the  distinctions  between  the  executive,  legisla- 
tive, and  judicial  departments  of  the  State  government. 

Three  days  later  the  Assembly,  continuing  to  follow 
the  British  example,  presented  a  Reply  to  the  Address, 
congratulating  the  Governor  upon  his  election, 
expressing  approval  of  his  reports  and  recommenda- 
tions, promising  promptly  to  take  up  the  matters  which 
he  had  presented  to  its  attention,  and  concluding: 

"The  several  precautions  taken  by  the  late  Conven- 
tion for  securing  to  the  subjects  (sic)  of  this  State  the 
full  enjoyment  of  political,  civil,  and  religious  liberty, 
do  equal  honor  to  their  wisdom  and  their  virtue.  We 
thoroughly  approve  your  Excellency's  intention  to 
retain  and  exercise  all  the  powers  with  which  you  are 
invested,  and  we  trust  that  you  will  exert  yourself 
vigorously  to  execute  the  laws  for  the  restoration  of 
good  order  and  the  suppression  and  punishment  of  vice 
and  immorality — while,  as  faithful  guardians  of  the 
rights  of  our  constituents,  we  are  determined  neither 
to  encroach  upon  the  privileges  of  others,  nor  suffer  our 
own  to  be  invaded,  we  shall  heartily  concur  in  all  things 
for  the  advantage  of  the  people  over  whom  you  have 
been  chosen  to  preside." 

To  this  the  Governor  formally  returned  his  thanks 
and  his  expressions  of  confidence  in  the  Assembly  and 
its  purposes.  Several  other  communications  were  sent 
by  the  Governor  to  the  Legislature,  concerning  the  con- 
duct of  the  war.  On  September  18  he  informed  the 
Senate  that  on  September  16  the  Assembly  had 
appointed  John  Morin  Scott,  Senator  from  the  South- 


64  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ern  district,  Jesse  Woodhull,  Senator  from  the  Middle 
district,  Abraham  Yates,  Senator  from  the  Western 
district,  and  Alexander  Webster,  Senator  from  the 
Eastern  district,  to  compose  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment. On  September  22  he  met  the  Senate  by  appoint- 
ment "at  the  house  of  Christopher  Tappan,"  to  receive 
its  reply  to  his  address,  and  to  thank  it  therefor;  these 
utterances  being  similar  to  those  which  had  already 
passed  between  the  Assembly  and  the  Governor. 

The  two  houses  then  settled  down  to  constructive 
legislation,  but  before  a  single  law  of  importance  was 
enacted  their  deliberations  were  rudely  interrupted. 
The  British  were  forcing  their  way  up  the  Hudson  in  a 
too  much  belated  attempt  to  save  Burgoyne;  the  same 
forces  which  some  months  before  had  compelled  the 
flight  from  White  Plains  and  Fishkill  northward  to 
Kingston.  General  Israel  Putnam  was  in  command  of 
the  defenses  of  the  Hudson,  but  was  unable  to  check  the 
hostile  advance,  and  soon  the  British  passed  around  the 
Dunderberg  and  came  upon  Forts  Montgomery  and 
Clinton,  the  last  defenses  before  Kingston  would  be 
reached.  Governor  Clinton  himself  was  in  command 
at  Fort  Montgomery,  and  his  brother  James  at  Fort 
Clinton.  The  garrisons  of  both  scarcely  equalled  a 
quarter  of  the  British  strength,  and  on  October  6  both 
fell  into  the  hands  of  the  British.  Governor  Clinton 
with  a  part  of  his  force  escaped  and  retired  toward 
Kingston,  knowing  that  the  fall  of  that  place  was 
inevitable  but  hoping  to  delay  the  British  advance  until 
the  archives  of  the  government  could  be  removed  to  a 
place  of  safety.  This  was  done,  a  hiding  place  being 


PHILIP  SCHUYLER 

Philip  Schuyler;  born  in  Albany,  N.  Y.(  November  22,  1733; 
served  in  the  colonial  army;  resigned  in  1757  and  was  sent 
to  England  to  settle  claims  in  1758;  delegate  to  continental 
congress,  1775-1777;  state  senator  from  western  New  York 
district,  1780-84,  1786-89  and  1792-97;  again  delegate  to  con- 
tinental congress,  1788-81;  United  States  senator,  1789-91; 
1797-98;  died  in  Albany,  N.  Y.,  November  18,  1804. 


RICHARD  MONTGOMERY 

Richard  Montgomery,  delegate  to  1st  provincial  convention 
and  soldier;  born  in  Dublin,  Ireland,  December  2,  1736;  grad- 
uated from  Trinity  college,  Dublin  at  the  age  of  18  and  entered 
the  British  army  as  an  ensign  in  the  17th  infantry;  shortly 
afterward  was  ordered  to  America  to  take  part  in  the  expedi- 
tion against  Louisburg;  promoted  to  be  a  captain  in  1762  and 
served  in  the  expeditions  against  Martinique  and  Havana;  re- 
turned to  Europe  in  1772,  coming  back  to  America  in  1773  when 
he  married  a  daughter  of  Robert  Livingston;  in  April,  1775  was 
chosen  to  represent  Dutchess  county  at  the  first  provincial  con- 
vention and  in  June  of  the  same  year  was  appointed  one  of  the 
eight  brigadier  generals — and  the  only  one  not  from  New  Eng- 
land— to  lead  the  expedition  against  Quebec;  he  fell  in  the 
attack  on  Quebec  December  31,  1775  and  a  monument  was 
erected  to  him  in  St.  Paul's  churchyard,  New  York  City  where 
manv  vears  later  his  remains  were  transferred. 


1777]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  65 

found  among  the  hills  of  Ulster  county,  at  Rochester. 

The  Legislature  promptly  ordered  all  possible  pro- 
visions and  livestock  to  be  placed  on  vessels  and  sent 
northward  to  Albany,  or  to  be  removed  to  the  interior. 
A  Council  of  Safety  was  appointed,  consisting  of  Wil- 
liam Floyd,  Evert  Bancker,  Egbert  Benson,  Daniel 
Dunscomb,  Robert  Harper,  Jonathan  Landon,  Levi 
Pawling,  John  Morin  Scott,  Johannes  Snyder,  Peter  P. 
Van  Zandt,  Alexander  Webster,  William  B.  Whiting, 
and  Abraham  Yates;  any  seven  of  whom  were  vested 
with  full  powers  of  government  as  long  as  the  neces- 
sities of  the  State  should  require  and  until  the  orderly 
reassembling  of  the  Legislature  should  be  possible. 
This  was  on  October  7,  in  the  forenoon.  The  Assembly 
then  took  a  recess  until  four  in  the  afternoon,  and  the 
Senate  until  the  next  morning.  But  when  four  o'clock 
came  so  many  members  of  the  Assembly  had  joined  the 
militia  in  the  field  that  no  quorum  could  be  had,  and 
the  next  morning  the  Senate,  finding  that  no  quorum 
of  the  Assembly  could  be  had,  and  realizing  the  futility 
of  its  own  meetings  in  such  circumstances,  adjourned 
until  such  time  as  the  Governor  should  think  it  proper 
to  reconvene  the  Legislature.  That  ended  all  sessions  at 
Kingston  for  a  long  time. 

The  British  reached  Kingston  on  October  16  and 
easily  swept  aside  the  150  militia  under  Levi  Pawling 
and  Johannes  Snyder,  who  were  all  the  American 
troops  in  the  vicinity,  and  in  a  few  hours  more  they  had 
burned  to  the  ground  every  building  in  the  town  save 
a  single  house.  Governor  Clinton  himself  lingered 
until  the  last,  holding  that  the  "captain  must  always  be 


66  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1777 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  last  to  leave  a  sinking  ship,"  and  narrowly  escaped 
capture.  He  made  his  way  by  night  across  the  Hudson, 
and  rejoined  his  family,  who  had  been  sent  some  days 
before  to  Pleasant  Valley,  northeast  of  Poughkeepsie. 
Thence  he  presently  recrossed  the  river  and  made  his 
way  to  Hurley,  where  he  gathered  such  forces  as  he 
could.  The  Council  of  Safety,  having  escaped  from 
Kingston,  met  on  October  19  at  Marbletown  and  took 
such  action  as  was  possible  for  the  relief  of  the  inhabi- 
tants who  had  been  despoiled  of  their  goods  and  homes 
by  the  British,  and  then  repaired  to  Hurley,  where  it 
made  its  headquarters  for  some  weeks.  It  was  a  striking 
coincidence  that  on  the  very  day  after  the  destruction  of 
Kingston,  Burgoyne  surrendered  his  whole  army  at 
Saratoga. 

Thereafter  for  some  weeks  the  affairs  of  the  State 
were  in  the  hands  of  the  Council  of  Safety,  which  led  a 
somewhat  roving  existence.  But  on  November  21  that 
body  sent  a  committee  to  confer  with  the  Governor 
concerning  the  practicability  of  "putting  an  end  to  the 
sessions  of  this  Council,  either  by  calling  the  Legisla- 
ture of  this  State,  or  a  convention  thereof."  Clinton  was 
then  settled  at  New  Windsor,  and  could  not  or  would 
not  remove  thence.  That  place  was  not  large  enough  to 
accommodate  the  Legislature,  and  the  nearest  place  to  it 
that  was  large  enough,  and  indeed  the  only  such  place 
near  enough  to  New  Windsor  to  suit  Clinton's  conve- 
nience, was  Poughkeepsie,  then  a  town  of  between  1,500 
and  2,000  inhabitants.  The  Governor  therefore 
requested  the  committee  to  ascertain  if  suitable  accom- 
modations could  be  obtained  there,  and,  being  assured 


1778]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  67 

that  they  could,  he  issued  on  December  15  a  proclama- 
tion convening  the  Legislature  at  Poughkeepsie  on 
January  5,  1778.  The  Committee  of  Safety  met  there 
on  December  22  and  daily  thereafter  until  January  7, 
when  it  abdicated  its  functions  in  favor  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, which  at  that  time  began  meeting  as  a  convention. 
This  arrangement  was  necessary  since  there  was  not  yet 
present  a  quorum  of  the  Senate.  The  latter  was  secured 
on  January  14,  and  on  the  following  day  the  two  houses 
resumed  the  meetings  which  had  been  interrupted  at 
Kingston.  The  place  of  meeting  was  the  Van  Kleeck 
mansion,  which  had  been  used  as  a  tavern. 

The  first  new  business  laid  before  the  Legislature  by 
the  Governor  was  "the  proposed  Articles  of  Confeder- 
ation and  perpetual  Union  between  the  United  States 
of  America,"  with  a  letter  from  the  Continental  Con- 
gress of  November  17,  1777,  recommending  them  to 
the  Legislature  of  New  York  for  consideration  and 
approval.  These  Articles  were  promptly  and  favorably 
considered,  and  on  February  6  were  ratified,  the  act  of 
ratification  forming  Chapter  I  of  the  Laws  of  the  State 
of  New  York.  The  New  York  Delegates  to  the  Conti- 
nental Congress  were  by  the  same  act  instructed  to  sign 
the  Articles.  But  this  was  done  with  a  reservation  to 
the  effect  that  the  ratification  and  signature  should  not 
become  valid  and  effective  until  like  action  had  been 
taken  by  all  the  other  States.  Although  the  New  York 
Delegates,  therefore,  signed  on  July  9,  and  most  of  the 
others  at  about  the  same  time,  New  York  was  tech- 


68  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1778 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

nically  not  a  member  of  the  Confederation  until  March 
1,  1781,  when  Maryland,  the  last  of  the  Thirteen,  signed 
the  Articles. 

The  other  major  topics  submitted  to  the  Legislature 
by  Clinton  in  his  first  address  to  that  body  were  taken 
up  and  satisfactorily  disposed  of  in  due  time.  Chapter 
XII  of  the  laws,  on  March  16,  provided  for  the  more 
complete  organization,  jurisdiction,  and  administration 
of  various  departments  and  offices  of  the  State  govern- 
ment John  Jay  was  made  Chief-Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  State;  Robert  R.  Livingston  was 
made  Chancellor;  and  Philip  Livingston,  James  Duane, 
Francis  Lewis,  and  Gouverneur  Morris  were  made 
Delegates  to  the  Continental  Congress.  Chapter  XVI, 
on  March  27,  was  an  election  law.  It  designated  the 
last  Tuesday  of  April  as  the  general  election  day,  on 
which  the  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  Senators, 
and  Assemblymen  should  be  chosen.  Votes  for  Gover- 
nor and  Lieutenant-Governor  were  to  be  cast  by  means 
of  paper  ballots,  but  those  for  members  of  both  houses 
of  the  Legislature  were  to  be  given  orally,  with  a  voice 
audible  to  the  inspectors  of  election.  The  official  term 
of  all  these  elective  officers  was  to  begin  on  the  first 
Monday  of  July  next  following  their  election.  This 
bill  was  vetoed  by  the  Council  of  Revision,  but  was 
repassed  over  the  veto. 

Chapter  XVII,  on  March  28,  was  intended  to 
rehabilitate  the  finances  of  the  State  by  leving  a  tax  of 
three  pence  a  pound  on  real  estate,  and  one  penny  half- 
penny a  pound  on  personal  property,  to  be  paid  to 
County  Treasurers  and  by  them  turned  in  to  the  State 


1778]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  69 

treasury.  This  also  was  vetoed  by  the  Council  of  Revi- 
sion, and  was  repassed  over  the  veto.  A  State  Treasurer 
was  not  provided  for  until  Chapter  XXVI,  on  April  1. 
A  general  militia  law  formed  Chapter  XXXIII,  on 
April  3.  It  is  of  curious  interest  to  recall,  also,  that 
Chapter  XXXIV,  on  April  3,  regulated  the  wages  of 
mechanics  and  laborers,  the  prices  of  all  goods  and 
commodities,  and  the  charges  of  inn-keepers,  within 
the  State.  This  was  done  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement 
which  had  been  reached  by  the  representatives  of  all  the 
States  at  New  Haven  in  January,  at  a  Convention  called 
for  that  purpose  at  the  request  of  the  Continental  Con- 
gress. But  as  a  number  of  the  States  did  not  approve 
that  agreement  or  put  it  into  effect,  Clinton  on  June 
22,  1778,  suggested  to  the  Legislature  the  inadvisability 
of  New  York's  acting  independently,  and  the  measure 
was  then  suspended  and  afterward  repealed. 

Most  of  the  other  acts  of  the  Legislature  at  this  ses- 
sion had  reference  to  matters  of  detail  concerning  gov- 
ernmental organization  or  the  prosecution  of  the  war, 
and  were  enacted  with  little  debate  or  difference  of 
opinion.  On  June  30,  1778,  the  Legislature  adjourned 
without  day. 

A  proclamation  was  issued  by  the  Governor  on 
September  1  following,  however,  reconvening  the 
Legislature  at  Poughkeepsie  on  October  1,  1778.  Very 
few  of  the  members  were  present  on  that  day  and  a 
quorum  could  not  5e  secured  until  October  13,  at  which 
time  the  Governor  again  made  a  formal  address  to  the 
houses  in  joint  session,  which  was  followed  with  replies 
from  the  houses  and  the  thanks  of  the  Governor  for 


70  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1778 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

them.  One  of  the  chief  topics  discussed  was  the 
insurgency  of  Vermont,  which  at  that  time  was  claimed 
as  the  Eastern  district  of  New  York.  In  a  message  to 
the  first  session  of  the  Legislature,  on  February  6,  the 
Governor  had  referred  at  some  length  to  that  region 
and  its  "designing  and  deluded  inhabitants  who  aim 
at  independency,"  and  the  Legislature  at  his  recom- 
mendation had  adopted  a  measure  confirming  land 
grants  and  giving  concessions  and  privileges  to  all 
actual  settlers  there  excepting  those  who  should  "yield 
or  acknowledge  any  allegiance  or  subjection  to  the  pre- 
tended State  of  Vermont."  In  October,  in  its  reply  to  the 
Governor's  address,  the  Assembly  referred  strongly  to 
the  same  subject,  and  significantly  declared :  "Little  will 
avail  our  resistance  to  a  foreign  enemy  and  domination 
unless  we  can,  by  enforcing  a  due  subordination  to  gov- 
ernment, establish  peace  and  good  order  among  our- 
selves." 

This  session  was  brief,  but  was  marked  with  the 
transaction  of  important  business.  A  joint  meeting 
elected  Delegates  to  Congress,  and  the  Assembly  elected 
a  Council  of  Appointment,  the  terms  for  which  those 
officers  had  formerly  been  chosen  having  expired.  The 
sum  of  twenty  thousand  pounds  was  placed  at  the  Gov- 
ernor's disposal  for  the  expenses  of  the  militia  when 
called  into  active  service  for  the  defense  of  the  State, 
and  other  acts  provided  for  the  distribution  of  food  and 
clothing  to  the  army.  The  Governor  transmitted  to  the 
Legislature  on  October  22  a  resolution  of  Congress  of 
ten  days  before,  recommending,  for  the  sake  of  "true 
religion  and  good  morals,  the  only  solid  foundation  of 


1778]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  71 

liberty  and  happiness,"  that  the  various  States  "take  the 
most  effectual  measures  for  the  encouragement  thereof, 
and  for  the  suppressing  of  theatrical  entertainments, 
horse  racing,  gaming,  and  such  other  diversions  as  are 
productive  of  idleness,  dissipation,  and  a  general 
depravity  of  principles  and  manners."  It  does  not 
appear,  however,  that  any  effective  action  was  taken 
upon  it. 

A  noteworthy  veto  message  came  from  the  Council  of 
Revision  on  November  5,  directed  against  the  Tax  law 
which  the  Legislature  had  enacted.  That  measure 
provided  for  a  surtax,  levied  according  to  the  judgment 
of  the  assessors  upon  those  persons  who,  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  necessities  of  the  country  in  time  of  war, 
had  amassed  extraordinary  gains — in  brief,  who  had 
been  guilty  of  what  in  our  own  time  has  been  known 
as  "profiteering."  The  Council  of  Revision  objected 
to  this  for  a  number  of  reasons :  Because  it  violated  the 
constitutional  principle  of  equal  rights;  because  to  tax 
a  faculty  is  to  tolerate  it,  and  a  vice  like  profiteering 
ought  not  to  be  tolerated;  because  this  method  of 
punishing  people  for  a  vicious  practice  was  unconsti- 
tutional ;  because  the  Legislature  was  not  authorized  by 
the  Constitution  to  exercise  or  to  delegate  the  exercise 
of  any  such  discriminatory  power  in  assessing  taxes; 
and  because,  on  various  and  numerous  other  grounds, 
the  provision  was  contrary  to  the  public  good.  The  bill 
was  not  repassed  over  this  veto. 

,  The  session  closed  on  November  6  with  an  adjourn- 
ment to  January  12,  1779.  A  quorum  was  not  obtained 
in  the  Senate  until  January  27,  or  in  the  Assembly 


72  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1779 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

until  January  28,  on  which  latter  date  the  session  began. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  session  the  Governor  trans- 
mitted to  the  Legislature,  simply  for  its  information, 
copies  of  the  treaties  of  amity  and  commerce,  and  of 
alliance  eventual  and  defensive,  between  the  United 
States  and  France.  He  also  reported  that  he  had  sus- 
pended sentence  of  death,  pending  action  of  the  Legis- 
lature, upon  a  woman  who  had  been  convicted  of  the 
murder  of  her  illegitimate  child.  The  Legislature 
thereupon  passed  an  act  granting  the  woman  a  full  par- 
don, on  the  ground  that  her  conviction  had  been 
procured  in  the  absence  of  a  material  witness  for  the 
defense.  This  was  the  first  pardon  granted  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  State.  On  March  16  the  Legislature 
adjourned  to  June  1,  to  meet  then  at  a  place  to  be 
designated  by  the  Governor.  He  did  not,  however,  call 
it  together  at  that  time,  so  that  it  did  not  meet  again 
during  the  life  of  that  Assembly.  A  new  Assembly  had 
been  elected  in  April,  to  assume  office  at  the  first  of  July. 
The  third  session  of  the  Legislature  was  summoned 
by  the  Governor,  in  a  proclamation  issued  on  July  17, 
1779,  to  meet  at  Kingston  on  August  9,  that  place  having 
been  sufficiently  rebuilt  to  afford  suitable  accommoda- 
tions. There  was  delay  in  assembling,  as  usual,  so  that 
a  quorum  was  not  obtained  in  both  houses  until  August 
24.  The  Governor's  address  and  the  transactions  of  the 
Legislature  had  chiefly  to  do  with  the  prosecution  of 
the  war  and  with  State  and  national  finances.  John  Jay 
having  been  appointed  Minister  to  Spain,  Philip 
Schuyler  was  chosen  to  succeed  him  in  Congress,  and 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  the  Chancellor  of  the  State,  was 


1780]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  73 

chosen  to  be  an  additional  Delegate  without  forfeiting 
his  Chancellorship.  A  bill  to  prohibit  theatrical  per- 
formances and  horse  races  was  effectively  vetoed.  On 
October  25  the  Legislature  adjourned  to  meet  on 
January  10  at  such  place  as  the  Governor  might  desig- 
nate. 

The  designation  proved  to  be  a  forecast  of  the  future 
arrangements  of  the  State  government.  On  December 
1  the  Governor  issued  a  call  for  the  Legislature  to  meet 
not  at  Kingston  or  at  Poughkeepsie  as  before,  but,  for 
the  first  time,  at  Albany,  and  not  on  January  10  as 
appointed  by  the  Legislature  itself,  but  on  January  4. 
A  number  of  members  were  present  promptly  on  the 
day  set,  but  owing  to  a  deep  fall  of  snow  and  inclement 
weather  a  quorum  did  not  arrive  until  January  27.  The 
session  was  chiefly  occupied  with  providing  supplies  for 
the  armies  and  similar  matters,  and  it  adjourned  to  meet 
on  June  1  at  a  place  to  be  named  by  the  Governor. 

He  named  Kingston  again,  in  a  proclamation  issued 
on  April  22,  and  set  the  time  as  May  9  instead  of  June 
1,  largely  because  of  the  urgency  of  dealing  with  the 
system  of  finance  which  had  been  adopted  by  Congress. 
There  was  no  quorum  until  May  25.  The  meeting 
lasted  until  July  2,  when  the  Legislature  adjourned 
without  day,  an  election  of  a  new  Assembly  having 
occurred  in  April  preceding. 

The  Fourth  Legislature  was  summoned  by  the  Gov- 
ernor on  August  4,  1780,  to  meet  at  Poughkeepsie  on 
September  4  following,  and  with  unprecedented 
promptness  a  quorum  of  both  houses  appeared  on  Sep- 
tember 7.  The  hearing  before  Congress  on  the  Vermont 


74  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1780-1 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

controversy  was  about  to  begin,  the  Delegates  were  the 
managers  in  behalf  of  New  York,  and  it  was  necessary 
therefore  to  elect  five  Delegates  to  succeed  those  whose 
terms  were  at  the  point  of  expiring;  which  election  was 
held  on  September  12.  A  bill  was  passed  providing  for 
the  appointment  of  a  Council  to  assist  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  State  during  the  recess  of  the  Legislature. 
This  the  Council  of  Revision  vetoed  on  the  grounds 
that  such  Council  would  exercise  powers  of  legislation, 
which  were  constitutionally  vested  in  the  Senate  and 
Assembly  and  could  not  be  delegated  by  them  to  others ; 
that  the  Council  would  interfere  with  the  functions  of 
the  Governor,  who  was  endowed  by  the  Constitution 
with  supreme  executive  power  and  authority;  and 
because  the  proposal  was  repugnant  to  the  spirit  and 
letter  of  the  Constitution,  and  would  impair  the  effi- 
ciency of  the  government.  The  bill  was  not  repassed. 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  October  10  until  Jan- 
uary 10,  1781 ;  but  the  Governor  on  November  25  called 
it  to  meet  on  January  2,  selecting  Albany  again  as  the 
place  of  meeting.  A  quorum  did  not  appear  until  Jan- 
uary 31,  when  a  very  brief  message  from  the  Governor 
dealt  entirely  with  military  affairs.  On  February  24 
he  reported  to  the  Legislature,  as  of  great  importance, 
for  prompt  consideration,  two  acts  of  Congress,  of 
February  3  and  4,  recommending  that  the  various 
States  vest  Congress  with  the  power  of  levying  duties  on 
imports.  Of  this  matter,  which  proved  to  be  of  vast 
importance  and  far-reaching  political  effect,  we  shall 
hear  more  hereafter.  On  March  19  he  announced  that 
the  Articles  of  Confederation  had  at  last  been  signed  by 


1781]  THE  FIRST  GOVERNOR  75 

all  thirteen  States.  "This  important  event,"  he  said,  "as 
it  establishes  our  union  and  defeats  the  first  hope  of  our 
enemy,  cannot  but  afford  the  highest  satisfaction;  and  I 
trust  that  this  State  will  be  as  distinguished  for  its  faith- 
ful adherence  to  this  great  national  compact,  so  essential 
to  the  peace  and  happiness  of  America,  as  it  has  hitherto 
been  for  its  exertions  in  the  common  cause."  This  also 
relates  to  something  of  which  we  shall  presently  hear 
more;  in  view  of  which  Clinton's  use  of  the  word 
"national"  is  to  be  remarked  as  of  special  and  signifi- 
cant interest. 

On  March  31  the  Legislature  adjourned  to  meet  on 
June  6  at  a  place  designated  by  the  Governor.  On  May 
8  he  designated  Poughkeepsie  as  the  place  of  meeting, 
where  a  quorum  did  not  appear  until  June  16.  Mean- 
time at  the  April  election  there  had  been  elected  a  new 
Senate  and  a  new  Assembly.  Governor  Clinton  had 
himself  been  reelected  in  April,  1780,  and  Pierre  Van 
Cortlandt  had  been  elected  Lieutenant-Governor,  con- 
firming him  in  the  place  to  which  he  had  been  elected 
three  years  before  by  the  Legislature. 


CHAPTER  IV 
FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE 

THE  Fifth  Legislature  was  summoned  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, in  a  proclamation  of  September  6,  to  meet 
at  Poughkeepsie  on  October  1,  1781.  A  quorum 
was  not  obtained  until  October  24,on  which  day  Gover- 
nor Clinton  made  his  opening  address.  The  first  duties 
of  the  Legislature  were  to  elect  (by  the  Assembly)  a  new 
Council  of  Appointment  and  by  joint  ballot  Delegates 
to  Congress.  These  duties  being  performed  on  October 
25  and  26  respectively,  the  financial  and  other  topics 
presented  by  the  Governor  were  promptly  taken  up,  and 
laws  were  enacted  enabling  the  State  Treasurer  to 
exchange  old  Continental  money  for  new;  levying  a 
State  tax;  requiring  County  Treasurers  to  make  returns 
of  taxes  to  the  State;  and  raising  the  sum  of  36,000 
pounds  by  tax  for  settling  public  accounts.  On  October 
29  the  Governor  had  the  joy  of  announcing  to  the 
Legislature  the  surrender  of  Cornwallis  at  Yorktown, 
which  had  occurred  ten  days  before.  A  long  letter 
from  Robert  Morris,  the  national  Superintendent  of 
Finance,  to  the  Governor,  concerning  the  requisitions 
which  Congress  was  about  to  make,  was  also  laid  before 
the  Legislature. 

There  was  much  discussion  of  the  Vermont  contro- 
very,  which  on  November  19  culminated  in  the  adop- 
tion of  a  drastic  series  of  resolutions,  declaring  that  the 
Legislature  was  "greatly  alarmed  at  the  evident  inten- 

76 


1781-2]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE 

tion  of  Congress  ...  to  establish  an  arbitrary 
boundary  whereby  to  exclude  out  of  this  State  the 
greatest  part  of  the  territory  .  .  .  belonging  most 
unquestionably  to  this  State  as  part,  parcel,  and  member 
thereof;  and  to  erect  such  dismemberment,  possessed  by 
revolted  subjects  of  this  State,  into  an  independent 
State,  and  as  such  to  admit  them  into  the  Federal  union 
of  these  United  States."  In  consequence  of  this  menace, 
the  Legislature  declared  it  to  be  its  sense  that  Congress 
had  no  authority  to  meddle  with  the  extent  of  juris- 
diction of  any  State,  except  in  controversies  between 
two  or  more  States,  to  admit  into  the  Union  any  new 
State  without  consent  of  nine  of  the  existing  States,  or 
above  all,  "to  create  a  new  State  by  dismembering  one 
of  the  Thirteen  United  States  without  their  universal 
consent."  Therefore  if  Congress  should  make  any 
attempt  to  carry  its  intention  into  effect,  the  Legislature 
of  New  York  felt  bound  to  declare  such  act  an  assump- 
tion of  power  contrary  to  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the 
Articles  of  Confederation,  and  solemnly  to  protest 
against  it. 

Three  days  later  resolutions  were  adopted  regretfully 
informing  Congress  that  there  was  very  little  hope  of 
New  York's  being  able  to  comply  with  any  of  the  requi- 
sitions of  Congress.  Then,  on  November  23,  the  Legis- 
lature adjourned  to  meet  at  Poughkeepsie  on  May  15, 
1782. 

On  January  20,  however,  the  Governor  issued  a 
proclamation  convening  it  on  February  11,  and  when 
on  February  23  a  quorum  was  secured  he  explained  in  a 
message  the  urgent  reasons  for  this  course.  These  were 


78  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1782 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

related  to  the  salient  topics  of  the  preceding  meeting. 
Congress  was  making  requisition  of  aids  in  men  and 
money,  and  there  were  important  communications  con- 
cerning them  from  the  commander-in-chief  and  from 
the  Superintendent  of  Finance.  These  Federal  relations 
were  so  important  and  urgent  as  to  overshadow  all 
merely  local  issues.  But  the  Vermont  troubles  could 
not  be  ignored,  and  the  Governor  therefore  laid  before 
the  Legislature  a  mass  of  documents  which  proved,  he 
said,  "a  treasonable  and  dangerous  intercourse  between 
the  leaders  of  the  revolt  in  the  northeastern  part  of  the 
State  and  the  common  enemy,"  adding  that  "these 
criminal  transactions  are  not  confined  to  individuals, 
but  have  been  conducted  under  the  countenance  and 
sanction  of  that  usurped  government." 

Among  the  recommendations  from  Congress  which 
were  reported  to  the  Legislature  was  one  for  the  taking 
of  a  census  of  the  white  inhabitants  of  the  State,  pur- 
suant to  the  ninth  Article  of  Confederation;  and  this 
was  ordered  by  the  Legislature  on  March  20.  On  April 
1 1  another  Congressional  suggestion  was  acted  upon  in 
the  incorporation  of  the  Bank  of  North  America  and 
the  prohibition  of  the  establishment  of  any  other  bank 
within  th»  State.  On  April  14  the  Legislature 
adjourned,  subject  to  the  call  of  the  Governor. 

There  was  no  further  call  for  the  services  of  that 
Legislature.  A  new  Assembly  was  elected  in  April, 
and  on  June  1 1  the  Governor  issued  a  proclamation 
convening  the  Sixth  Legislature  at  Poughkeepsie  on 
July  3,  1782.  A  quorum  was  obtained  on  July  11,  when 
the  Governor  delivered  an  opening  address  agreeably 


1782]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  79 

different  in  tone  from  those  which  had  been  largely 
monopolized  by  matters  of  war  and  wartime  finance. 
"With  great  satisfaction"  he  announced  the  birth  of  a 
dauphin  of  France,  and  he  dwelt  at  some  length  and 
with  much  earnestness  upon  the  great  desirability  of 
fostering  and  promoting  popular  education.  The  great 
arrearages  of  taxes  which  had  been  reported  suggested 
the  need  of  some  reform  of  the  taxation  laws;  in 
response  to  which,  in  addition  to  the  levying  of  new 
taxes,  a  stringent  law  for  the  collection  of  arrears  was 
passed.  No  practical  attention  was  paid,  however,  to 
the  recommendations  for  public  instruction.  That 
matter  was  left  for  action  two  years  later,  after  the  Gov- 
ernor had  again  taken  it  up  in  his  address  in  January, 
1784.  After  a  brief  session  the  Legislature  adjourned 
on  July  25  to  meet  on  January  7,  1783,  at  a  place  to  be 
determined  by  the  Governor. 

Brief  as  was  this  session,  however,  it  comprised  one 
act  which  we  must  reckon  among  the  most  momentous 
and  most  far-reaching  in  its  results  of  all  that  had  been 
performed  since  the  creation  of  the  State.  Indeed,  it 
was  one  of  the  most  important  in  the  entire  history  of 
the  State  of  New  York,  since  it  was  nothing  less  than 
the  first  definite  step  toward  drafting  and  adopting  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  thus  transforming 
the  Confederation  into  a  true  Nation.  In  that  incident 
the  commanding  figure  of  Alexander  Hamilton  first 
appeared  as  a  factor  in  the  politics  of  New  York.  He 
had  only  recently  settled  in  New  York  City  as  a  prac- 
ticing lawyer,  and  held  no  public  office,  though  later  in 
that  same  year  he  was  elected  a  Delegate  to  Congress. 


80  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1782 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

He  drafted,  however,  early  in  July,  a  most  impressive 
series  of  resolutions,  which  he  had  his  friends  introduce 
into  the  Legislature,  and  which  were  adopted  by  the 
Senate  on  July  20,  1782,  and  by  the  Assembly  a  few  days 
later — in  each  case  by  unanimous  vote. 

These  resolutions,  referring  to  various  representa- 
tions of  Congress  and  of  the  Superintendent  of  Finance, 
expressed  the  opinion  that  the  situation  of  the  States 
was  "in  a  peculiar  manner  critical"  and  afforded  the 
strongest  reason  to  fear  that  a  continuation  of  the  exist- 
ing constitution,  or  Articles  of  Confederation,  would 
result  in  "a  subversion  of  public  credit  and  conse- 
quences highly  dangerous  to  the  safety  and  independ- 
ence of  these  States";  that  the  States  might  not  there- 
after be  able  to  secure  pecuniary  aid  from  France;  that 
the  plan  then  just  adopted  by  Congress  for  the  adminis- 
tration of  finances  was  wise  and  sound,  but  that  the 
provisions  made  by  the  individual  States  for  carrying 
on  the  war  were  hopelessly  inadequate;  that  the  British 
government  had  adopted  a  new  policy  "calculated  to 
conciliate  in  Europe  and  to  seduce  in  America"  and 
therefore  very  dangerous  to  this  country;  that  the  exist- 
ing system  of  these  States  exposed  the  common  cause  to 
a  precarious  issue;  that  the  state  of  European  affairs 
afforded  reasonable  grounds  for  confidence  in  American 
success  if  only  a  more  effectual  system  of  cooperation 
were  adopted;  that  the  radical  source  of  most  of  the 
embarrassments  was  the  lack  of  sufficient  power  in 
Congress,  particularly  in  its  inability  to  provide  revenue 
for  itself  and  thus  to  maintain  public  credit;  that  credit 
was  essential,  since  the  fullest  revenue  of  the  States 


ALEXANDER  HAMILTON 

Alexander  Hamilton,  statesman;  lawyer;  born  in  Nevis, 
British  West  Indies,  February  11,  1757;  came  to  U.  S.,  1772; 
served  in  continental  army;  secretary  of  treasury  under  Wash- 
ington, 1779;  delegate  to  continental  congress,  1782,  1788; 
member  of  federal  commercial  convention,  1786;  regent,  1784; 
member  of  assembly,  New  York  county,  1787;  state  constitu- 
tional convention,  1788;  mortally  wounded  in  a  duel  with 
Aaron  Burr  at  Weehawken  on  the  Hudson,  July  11,  1804  and 
died  on  the  following  day. 


WILLIAM  WALTON* 

William  Walton,  6th  president  New  York  chamber  of  com- 
merce, horn  New  York  City,  1725;  succeeded  his  uncle,  Wil- 
liam Walker,  as  merchant  and  shipowner  of  great  wealth; 
president  chamber  of  commerce,  1774-1775;  sympathized  with 
the  patriot  cause,  but  the  family  of  his  wife  supported  the 
crown  and  he  was  persuaded  to  retire  to  his  country  estate  in 
New  Jersey;  when  the  British  occupied  New  York  he  returned 
and  remained  until  the  close  of  the  war  and  was  untiring  and 
earnest  in  relieving  the  suffering  of  American  soldiers;  in  1783 
he  was  elected  vict-president  of  the  chamber  of  commerce;  died 
in  New  York  City,  November  7,  1794. 


1789] 


UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  113 


There  could  be  no  question  of  Yates's  fitness  for  the 
Governorship.  Neither  could  there  be  any  doubt  that 
Hamilton  had  selected  him  not  alone  for  his  merits  but 
also  for  his  availability  as  a  candidate  who  would 
divide  the  Anti-Federalist  party  and  rob  Clinton  of 
many  of  his  supporters.  A  letter  was  written  to  Yates, 
signed  by  a  number  of  eminent  citizens,  including 
Philip  Schuyler  and  Philip  Livingston,  asking  him  to 
accept  the  nomination  with  a  view  thus  to  "heal  the 
unhappy  divisions  in  the  country."  On  February  24  he 
replied  with  his  acceptance.  Beside  the  men  already 
mentioned,  John  Jay,  Robert  R.  Livingston,  and  other 
influential  men  arrayed  themselves  on  Yates's— and 
Hamilton's — side.  On  Clinton's  side  were  his  brother 
James  Clinton;  John  Lansing,  afterward  Chancellor  of 
the  State;  Melancthon  Smith,  Gilbert  Livingston,  and 
Samuel  Jones,  the  first  Comptroller  of  the  State  and  one 
of  the  foremost  jurists  of  the  time. 

For  six  weeks  a  vigorous  and  heated  campaign  was 
waged,  ending  with  an  election  of  mixed  results. 
Generally  the  Federalists  were  successful.  They  elected 
a  majority  of  the  Legislature,  and  for  Governor  they 
carried  most  of  the  counties  for  Yates.  But  in  his  own 
county  of  Ulster,  then  one  of  the  largest  in  the  State, 
the  vote  for  Clinton  was  so  nearly  unanimous  as  to  give 
him  a  small  majority  in  the  State  as  a  whole  and  thus  to 
elect  him  for  his  fifth  term.  In  Ulster  county 
Clinton  had  a  majority  of  941,  while  in  all  the  rest  of 
the  State  there  was  a  majority  of  512  against  him.  He 
thus  won  by  the  narrow  margin  of  429  in  a  total  poll  of 
12,343.  (It  must  be  remembered,  in  explanation  of  the 


114  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1789 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

smallness  of  the  total  vote  of  the  State,  that  at  this  time 
only  freeholders  enjoyed  the  franchise.)  This  purely 
personal  victory  went  far  toward  consoling  Clinton  for 
the  defeats  which  he  had  suffered  at  the  hands  of  Ham- 
ilton. It  also  assured  a  continuance,  and  indeed  an 
intensification,  of  the  hostility  between  those  two 
leaders. 

Almost  simultaneously  with  this  great  personal 
triumph  of  Clinton,  a  great  counter-advantage  was 
gained  by  Hamilton.  The  inauguration  of  Washington 
as  President  of  the  United  States  occurred  at  the  end  of 
April,  and  Hamilton,  as  his  closest  and  most  trusted 
friend,  was  made  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  then  by 
far  the  most  influential  place  in  the  cabinet.  That 
assured  the  filling  of  all  Federal  offices  in  New  York 
with  Hamilton's  friends,  and  the  appointment  of  others 
to  other  places  under  the  administration.  Thus  John 
Jay  became  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States — an  appointment  which,  however,  must 
be  credited  to  his  preeminent  fitness  rather  than  to  the 
influence  of  Hamilton,  though  it  was  of  course  greatly 
to  Hamilton's  liking.  James  Duane,  one  of  Hamilton's 
most  devoted  friends,  a  man  of  wealth,  of  long  experi- 
ence in  Congress,  of  spotless  integrity,  and  of  vast  legal 
ability,  was  made  United  States  District  Court  Judge. 
Richard  Harrison,  another  brilliant  lawyer,  was  United 
States  District  Attorney,  and  William  S.  Smith  was 
United  States  Marshal.  To  these  friends  of  Hamilton 
must  be  added  Egbert  Benson  and  two  other  Represen- 
tatives in  Congress,  and  the  two  Senators,  Philip 
Schuyler  and  Rufus  King,  when  they  were  chosen  a 


1789]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  115 

little  later.  In  the  State  government,  too,  he  enjoyed 
the  friendship  and  support  of  Robert  R.  Livingston, 
the  Chancellor,  and  Richard  Morris,  the  Chief-Justice 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  together  with  various  other 
officers,  and  a  majority  of  the  Legislature. 

As  soon  as  "the  tumult  and  the  shouting"  of  the  elec- 
toral campaign  had  died  away,  on  June  4  Clinton 
issued  a  call  for  a  special  session  of  the  Thirteenth  Leg- 
islature, to  be  held  at  Albany  on  July  6,  1789.  For  the 
first  time,  a  quorum  was  present  on  the  day  appointed, 
and  the  Governor  delivered  a  brief  opening  address, 
saying  that  he  had  convened  the  Legislature  for  the 
purpose  of  choosing  United  States  Senators,  and  making 
no  other  recommendations.  The  response  of  the  Legis- 
lature was  brief  and  perfunctory,  and  the  two  houses 
immediately  addressed  themselves  to  the  task  of  pro- 
viding for  the  election  of  Senators.  After  a  week  of 
labor  the  mountain  brought  forth  a  particularly  ridicu- 
lous mouse.  The  bill,  on  July  12,  provided  that  when 
two  Senators  were  to  be  chosen  at  the  same  time — some- 
thing which  of  course  would  seldom  happen,  if  indeed 
ever  after  the  first  election, — if  each  house  nominated 
different  candidates  each  house  should  be  required  to 
elect  one  of  those  named  by  the  other,  but  if  only 
one  Senator  was  to  be  chosen,  and  the  two  houses  named 
different  candidates,  each  house  might  from  time  to 
time  offer  to  the  other  a  resolution  of  concurrence, 
naming  one  of  its  own  candidates,  until  at  last  agree- 
ment should  be  reached.  This  fantastic  scheme  was 
promptly  vetoed  by  the  Council  of  Revision,  whereupon 
the  Legislature  by  joint  resolution  appointed  Philip 


116  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1789 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Schuyler  and  Rufus  King  to  be  Senators;  the  latter  for 
the  full  term  and  the  former  for  the  short  term  with  the 
tacit  understanding  that  at  its  expiration  he  was  to  be 
reflected  for  a  full  term.  Mr.  King,  it  may  be  noted, 
had  only  recently  become  a  citizen  and  resident  of  New 
York,  having  come  from  Massachusetts;  but  his  com- 
manding abilities  and  his  fine  record  in  the  Continental 
Congress  commended  him  to  all  parties  in  New  York 
as  a  worthy  Senator. 

Congress  having  taken  a  hand  in  the  Vermont  con- 
troversy, and  New  York  having  reluctantly  acquiesced, 
perforce,  in  the  erection  of  what  it  had  claimed  as  its 
northeastern  counties  into  an  independent  State,  the 
Legislature  appointed  Commissioners  with  authority 
to  declare  the  assent  of  New  York  to  such  action.  It 
was,  however,  found  necessary  for  the  Legislature, 
another  commission,  with  somewhat  different  powers, 
to  complete  that  transaction.  On  July  16,  1789,  the 
during  its  second  meeting,  on  March  6,  1790,  to  appoint 
Thirteenth  Legislature  adjourned  to  meet  at  New  York 
on  the  second  Monday  of  January,  1790,  unless  earlier 
convoked  by  the  Governor. 

Meantime  the  political  fight  between  Hamilton  and 
Clinton  had  been  marked  with  another  first-class  stroke 
by  the  veteran  Governor.  Egbert  Benson,  a  friend  of 
Hamilton's,  had  been  Attorney-General  of  the  State, 
but  upon  his  election  to  Congress  had  resigned  that 
office  and  had  been  succeeded,  on  May  14,  1789,  by 
Richard  Varick.  The  latter  in  turn  resigned  the  office 
in  September  following,  and  on  September  29  the 
Council  of  Appointment  met  to  fill  that  and  other 


1789]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  117 

vacancies.  That  Council  then  consisted  of  Samuel 
Townsend,  Peter  Van  Ness,  John  Hathorn,  and  John 
Williams,  all  supporters  of  the  Governor,  with  Clinton 
himself  as  president.  The  result  of  the  meeting  was 
the  appointment  of  John  Lansing,  Jr.,  to  be  Mayor  of 
Albany,  and  Samuel  Jones  to  be  Recorder  of  New 
York,  both  staunch  partisans  of  Clinton  and  men  of 
great  ability  and  fitness  for  office,  and  also — and  this 
was  Clinton's  master-stroke — Aaron  Burr  to  be  Attor- 
ney-General. 

In  making  this  last  appointment  Clinton  had  doubt- 
less three  motives.  One  was,  to  fill  the  place  with  a  man 
of  undoubted  ability  and  professional  fitness;  and  of 
Burr's  answering  that  description  there  could  be  no 
question.  Another  was,  to  cause  schism  in  the  Feder- 
alist party.  Burr  had  identified  himself  with  that  party 
in  promoting  the  candidacy  of  Yates  against  Clinton, 
though  he  doubtless  did  so  for  reasons  of  political 
expediency  and  not  at  all  on  principle,  the  latter  being 
something  entirely  foreign  and  unknown  to  him.  He 
had  a  considerable  following  among  the  younger  men 
of  that  party,  and  Clinton  shrewdly  judged  that  they 
would  adhere  to  him  if  he  transferred  himself  to  the 
Anti-Federalist  party.  The  third  and  by  no  means  least 
motive  was  to  oppose  Hamilton  with  his  bitterest 
enemy,  for  such  Burr  had  already  become.  The 
instinctive  dislike  which  had  arisen  between  the  two 
young  men  at  their  first  meeting  had  grown  steadily 
more  intense;  on  Burr's  side  through  jealousy  of  Ham- 
ilton's superior  genius  and  the  resentment  which  turpi- 
tude always  feels  against  integrity,  and  on  Hamilton's 


118  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1790 


side  through  recognition  of  Burr's  essential  dishonesty 
and  corruption  and  also  because  of  Burr's  venomous 
hostility  to  Washington,  whom  Hamilton  loved  and 
revered  above  all  other  men.  Clinton  deemed  it  a 
shrewd  move,  therefore,  to  put  this  bitter  foe  of  Ham- 
ilton's into  an  influential  political  office,  rightly  assum- 
ing that  for  the  sake  of  the  place,  and  especially  for  the 
sake  of  thus  being  able  to  spite  Hamilton,  Burr  would 
not  hesitate  to  turn  his  political  coat.  In  later  years 
Clinton  had  cause  to  realize  that  the  man  of  whom  he 
had  thus  made  use  was  unworthy  of  recognition  by 
decent  statesmen,  being  always  for  sale  at  the  highest 
price  he  could  command. 

No  immediate  results  of  this  appointment  of  Burr 
were  apparent,  however,  and  the  affairs  of  the  State 
pursued  an  even  tenor  until  the  next  year.  The  Thir- 
teenth Legislature  met  again  at  New  York  on  January 
4,  1790,  and  secured  a  quorum  on  the  following  day. 
The  Governor's  address  recommended  the  creation  or 
improvement  of  means  of  communication,  and  as  a 
result  the  Legislature  on  March  4  made  an  enactment 
for  the  building  of  roads  and  the  surveying  of  routes 
for  canals.  A  Legislative  Apportionment  act  was  also 
passed,  on  February  7.  The  Governor  submitted  the 
twelve  amendments  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  which  had  been  proposed  by  Congress,  arrange- 
ments were  made  for  a  census  of  the  electors  of  the 
State,  the  revised  action  concerning  Vermont,  already 
mentioned,  was  taken,  and  on  April  6  the  Legislature 
adjourned  without  day. 


1790]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  119 

The  most  important  political  act  of  this  Legislature 
related  to  the  Council  of  Appointment.  The  body  had 
been  solidly  Anti-Federalist.  But  the  Federalists  were 
now  sufficiently  in  control  of  the  Assembly  to  change  its 
complexion.  Accordingly,  on  January  15  they  elected 
Philip  Schuyler  and  Philip  Livingston,  who  were  Fed- 
eralists, and  John  Cantine  and  Edward  Savage,  who 
were  Anti-Federalists — or  Republicans,  as  Clinton's 
followers  now  began  to  call  themselves.  This  was  a 
commendable  division  of  the  Council  between  the 
parties,  and  certainly  gave  Clinton  no  cause  for  com- 
plaint, since  he  was  ex-officio  president  of  the  Council 
and  had  the  casting  vote.  Unfortunately,  however, 
Philip  Schuyler  was  United  States  Senator.  At  the  time 
of  his  election  to  the  Council  nobody  thought  of  the 
impropriety  of  his  holding  the  two  offices.  But  that 
was  presently  thought  of,  and  twelve  days  later  the 
Assembly  passed  a  resolution  declaring  it  contrary  to 
the  United  States  Constitution  for  a  person  holding 
office  under  the  Federal  government  to  be  at  the  same 
time  a  member  of  the  Legislature  of  New  York,  and 
that  accordingly  when  a  member  of  the  Legislature  was 
elected  or  appointed  to  Federal  office  his  seat  should  be 
declared  vacant.  This  entirely  proper  resolution  was 
promptly  adopted  by  the  Senate  also  and  became  law. 
Under  it,  therefore,  Schuyler's  seat  in  the  State  Senate 
was  declared  vacant;  as  were  also  the  seats  of  James 
Duane,  who  had  been  appointed  Judge  of  the  United 
States  District  Court,  and  of  John  Hathorn  and  John 
Lawrence,  who  had  been  elected  Representatives  in 
Congress. 


120  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1790 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  question  of  Schuyler's  place  in  the  Council  of 
Appointment  then  arose.  At  a  meeting  of  the  Council 
on  April  3  Mr.  Cantine  suggested  that  as  the  Council 
was,  under  the  Constitution,  to  consist  of  four  Senators 
and  as  General  Schuyler's  seat  in  the  Senate  had  been 
declared  by  the  Senate  to  be  vacant,  that  gentleman 
could  no  longer  be  a  member  of  the  Council.  That 
seemed  logical.  Philip  Livingston,  however,  replied 
that  if  the  Senate  thus  had  power  to  vacate  seats  in  the 
Council,  it,  instead  of  the  Assembly,  could  control  the 
composition  of  that  body,  which  was  certainly  contrary 
to  the  intent  of  the  Constitution ;  wherefore  he  proposed 
a  resolution  of  the  Council  to  the  effect  that  after  the 
Assembly  had  appointed  a  man  to  the  Council,  the 
Council  itself  had  no  power  to  expel  or  disqualify  him, 
even  though  his  seat  in  the  Senate  had  been  declared 
vacant.  This  of  course  by  implication,  though  not  in 
terms,  referred  the  matter  back  to  the  Assembly,  where 
it  obviously  belonged.  No  action  was  taken  by  the 
Council  upon  either  Mr.  Cantine's  suggestion  or  Mr. 
Livingston's  proposal,  and  nobody  appears  to  have 
thought  of  a  pertinent  precedent  of  nine  years  before 
when  Ephraim  Paine,  a  member  of  the  Council,  had 
been  expelled  from  the  Senate.  At  that  time  the  Assem- 
bly at  once  elected  Arthur  Parks,  a  Senator,  to  Paine's 
place.  But  the  Council,  including  Mr.  Parks  himself, 
formally  protested  against  this  proceeding  and  against 
Mr.  Parks's  right  to  a  seat  in  that  body;  though  in  the 
face  of  that  protest  Mr.  Parks  did  occupy  his  seat  in  the 
Council  until  the  next  Assembly,  the  next  year,  elected 
another  Senator  in  his  place. 


1790]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  121 

A  few  days  after  the  discussion  raised  by  Mr.  Cantine 
and  Mr.  Livingston,  a  motion  was  made  by  Mr.  Savage 
and  adopted  by  the  Council,  requesting  the  opinion  of 
the  Assembly  on  the  question.  The  Assembly  after 
some  debate  replied  that  it  considered  it  a  question  of 
law  upon  which  it  could  not  properly  pass.  Thereupon 
the  matter  was  dropped,  and  General  Schuyler,  though 
in  the  face  of  protests  and  objections,  continued  to  fill 
his  place  in  the  Council  of  Appointment  until  his  suc- 
cessor was  regularly  elected  by  the  next  year's  Assembly. 

Following  this,  a  sharp  contest  arose  over  appoint- 
ments to  office.  Richard  Morris,  a  Federalist,  resigned 
his  place  as  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
State,  and  Robert  Yates  was  appointed  to  succeed  him. 
This  was  of  course  acceptable  to  the  Federalist  members 
of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  and  was  cordially 
acquiesced  in  by  the  Anti-Federalists.  Indeed,  the 
appointment  was  made  at  Clinton's  own  suggestion, 
despite  the  fact  that  Yates  had  been  his  opponent  in  the 
Governorship  campaign,  possibly  because  he  was  glad 
to  get  Yates  out  of  politics,  though  doubtless  also 
because  he  appreciated  his  fitness  for  the  place.  Then 
came  a  fight  over  Yates's  successor  as  Associate-Judge. 
The  Federalists  nominated  Egbert  Benson,  and  the 
Anti-Federalists  nominated  John  Lansing  and  the  latter 
was  chosen  by  virtue  of  the  Governor's  casting  vote. 
A  similar  contest  was  decided  similarly  for  the  choice 
of  a  Mayor  of  Albany  to  succeed  Mr.  Lansing,  and  for 
several  other  officers. 


122  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1791 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  Fourteenth  Legislature  assembled  at  New  York 
on  January  4,  1791,  and  secured  a  quorum  the  following 
day.  In  his  address  the  Governor  called  attention  to  the 
need  of  making  such  provision  for  the  creditors  of  the 
State  as  would  maintain  the  public  faith;  in  response  to 
which  the  Legislature  passed  a  suitable  act  on  February 
23.  His  report  that  the  census  of  electors  had  been 
taken,  and  that  a  legislative  reapportionment  of  the 
State  was  in  order,  led  to  the  enactment  of  an  Appor- 
tionment bill  on  February  7.  The  need  of  better  means 
of  communication  and  transportation  was  again  urged, 
and  the  Legislature  on  March  24  provided  for  the 
building  of  some  roads  and  the  surveying  of  canal 
routes.  On  the  same  day  also,  in  response  to  a  memorial 
from  the  Regents  of  the  State  University,  transmitted 
by  the  Governor,  authorization  was  made  for  the  foun- 
dation of  a  College  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons.  On 
that  date  the  Legislature  adjourned  without  day. 

The  great  event  of  this  session  of  the  Legislature  was 
the  election  of  a  United  States  Senator  to  succeed  Philip 
Schuyler.  In  order  justly  to  appreciate  the  circum- 
stances, it  must  be  remembered  that  at  this  time  New 
York  State  was  dominated  by  three  great  families. 
These  were  the  Schuylers,  the  Livingstons,  and  the 
Clintons.  Of  the  first,  General  Philip  Schuyler  was 
the  head,  while  his  son-in-law,  Alexander  Hamilton, 
was  the  most  active  protagonist.  General  Schuyler  was 
one  of  the  most  worthy  veterans  of  the  Revolution,  and 
a  man  of  commanding  ability,  approved  devotion  to  the 
public  welfare,  and  spotless  integrity;  but  also  of 
unbending  pride  and  autocratic  spirit.  Robert  R. 


1791]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  123 

Livingston  was  head  of  the  Livingston  clan ;  also  a  man 
of  vast  ability,  high  patriotism,  unsullied  character,  and 
singular  personal  charm.  The  Governor  himself  was 
the  head  of  the  Clintons,  ably  seconded  by  his  gallant 
soldier  brother,  James,  and  the  latter's  son,  DeWitt, 
destined  to  be  the  greatest  of  them  all. 

Between  the  aristocratic  Schuylers  and  Livingstons 
there  was  a  natural  affinity,  rather  than  between  either 
of  them  and  the  more  democratic  Clintons,  and  it  was 
through  a  coalition  of  those  two  families  that  Hamilton 
had  been  able  to  defeat  Clinton  and  secure  New  York's 
ratification  of  the  Federal  Constitution.  At  that  time 
Chancellor  Livingston  was  one  of  Hamilton's  warmest 
friends  and  most  resolute  supporters.  But  with  that 
strange  lack  of  ability  to  manage  men  and  parties  which 
characterized  him,  Hamilton  on  becoming  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  quite  neglected  to  give  any  recognition  to 
the  Livingstons.  John  Jay,  whose  wife  was  a  Living- 
ston, was  indeed  made  Chief-Justice,  but,  as  we  have 
seen,  that  was  scarcely  to  be  credited  to  Hamilton's 
influence.  Moreover,  that  appointment  was  actually  an 
offense  to  the  Livingstons,  who  had  regarded  the  Chan- 
cellor as  the  logical  candidate  for  that  place.  Schuyler 
was  made  Senator,  but  no  Livingston  was  chosen  to  the 
other  Senatorship,  but  a  newcomer  from  Massachusetts 
instead.  Nor  was  any  member  of  the  Livingston  family 
chosen  for  a  foreign  mission,  or  for  any  other  place 
under  the  administration  of  which  Hamilton  was  the 
chief  political  manager. 

It  would  not  have  been  human  nature  for  Robert  R. 
Livingston  to  overlook  or  to  condone  such  disregard  of 


124  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1791 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

his  friendship  and  his  aid.  His  appreciation  of  Ham- 
ilton's ability  may  not  have  been  lessened,  but  his  per- 
sonal and  political  feeling  toward  him  changed  in  a  day 
from  affection  to  bitterness.  He  called  the  family 
together  in  council,  and  decreed  that  thereafter  there 
should  be  no  favors  shown  to  Hamilton,  or  indeed  to 
the  Federal  administration  so  long  as  he  dominated  it. 
Later,  when  Washington  offered  to  Robert  R  Living- 
ston the  mission  to  France,  which  under  other  circum- 
stances would  doubtless  have  been  gladly  accepted,  it 
was  almost  indignantly  declined. 

The  open  rupture  between  the  Schuylers  and  Living- 
stons came  in  1791.  Early  in  that  year  a  Senator  was 
to  be  chosen  to  succeed  Schuyler,  who,  as  we  have  seen, 
had  accepted  the  short  term  on  the  understanding  that 
he  was  to  be  reflected.  But  less  than  two  years  had  made 
marked  changes  in  politics,  and  Clinton  was  now 
relentlessly  resolute  upon  the  defeat  of  Schuyler,  not 
merely  nor  so  much  because  he  was  Schuyler,  as  because 
he  was  the  father-in-law  of  Hamilton.  In  the  alienation 
of  the  Livingstons  from  Hamilton  and  therefore  from 
the  Schuylers  he  saw  his  opportunity,  and  in  Aaron 
Burr  he  found  his  facile  tool.  He  determined  to  put 
Burr  forward  as  a  candidate  against  Schuyler,  and  then, 
to  assure  the  support  of  the  Livingstons,  he  promised  to 
secure  the  appointment  of  Morgan  Lewis,  brother-in- 
law  of  Chancellor  Livingston,  as  Burr's  successor  as 
Attorney-General  of  the  State. 

This  "deal,"  as  it  would  now  be  called,  succeeded. 
Nominally  there  was  a  Federalist  majority  in  the 
Legislature,  which  should  have  assured  Schuyler's 


1791]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  125 

reelection,  a  result  upon  which  both  he  and  Hamilton 
confidently  counted.  But  the  Livingston  influence 
changed  a  number  of  votes,  and,  as  Clinton  had 
reckoned,  several  of  Burr's  personal  adherents  were 
ready  to  go  over  to  the  Anti-Federalist  side  in  his  sup- 
port. Philip  Livingston,  a  State  Senator,  alone  of  all 
his  clan  remained  loyal  to  Hamilton  and  voted  for 
Schuyler.  In  the  Senate  there  were  eight  absentees,  or 
at  least  non-voters.  Of  the  sixteen  present  and  voting, 
twelve  voted  for  Burr  and  only  four  for  Schuyler.  In 
the  Assembly  Burr  had  a  majority  of  only  five.  A 
motion  was  made  to  reconsider  the  vote  and  to  substitute 
the  name  of  Egbert  Benson  for  that  of  Burr,  but  it 
failed.  So  Burr  was  elected  Senator,  and  in  fulfillment 
of  the  "deal"  in  the  following  November  Morgan 
Lewis  was  made  Attorney-General  of  the  State. 

It  should  be  added  that  the  Livingstons  generally 
gave  as  the  reason  for  their  revolt  against  Hamilton 
their  disapproval  of  his  funding  system,  and  particu- 
larly his  plan  for  the  disposition  of  the  State  debts. 
There  is  no  occasion  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  their 
disagreement  with  him  on  this  ground,  though  it  is 
impossible  to  doubt  that  the  other  motives  which  we 
have  described  had  commanding  weight. 

The  Apportionment  act  already  mentioned  as  having 
been  passed  at  this  session  was  based  on  an  enumeration 
of  19,626  electors,  or  817  for  each  of  the  twenty-four 
Senators.  The  act  made  a  Southern  district  of  Suffolk, 
Queens,  Kings,  Richmond,  New  York,  and  Westchester 
counties,  with  eight  Senators;  a  Middle  district  of 
Dutchess,  Ulster,  and  Orange  counties,  with  six  Sen- 


126  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ators;  an  Eastern  district  of  Washington,  Columbia, 
Clinton,  and  Rensselaer  counties  (the  last  newly 
formed),  with  five  Senators;  and  a  Western  district  of 
Albany,  Montgomery,  Saratoga,  and  Ontario  counties 
(the  latter  two  newly  made)  with  five  Senators.  Ten 
days  later  the  new  counties  of  Herkimer,  Otsego,  and 
Tioga  were  created  out  of  parts  of  Montgomery 
county.  The  act  also  directed  that  the  Assembly  should 
consist  of  seventy-three  members,  apportioned  among 
the  counties  as  follows:  Albany,  Dutchess,  and  New 
York,  seven  each;  Columbia,  six;  Montgomery, 
Orange,  Rensselaer,  Ulster,  and  Westchester,  five  each ; 
Saratoga,  Suffolk,  and  Washington,  four  each ;  Queens, 
three;  Kings,  Richmond,  Ontario,  Herkimer,  Otsego, 
and  Tioga,  one  each. 

The  Fifteenth  Legislature  met  at  New  York  on  Janu- 
ary 5,  1792,  with  a  quorum  present  on  the  first  day,  and 
remained  in  session  until  April  12.  The  Governor 
urged  further  attention  to  means  of  communication  and 
transport,  and  in  consequence  acts  were  passed  on 
March  30  for  the  incorporation  of  two  canal  com- 
panies— one  to  operate  waterways  from  the  Hudson 
River  to  Seneca  Lake  and  Lake  Ontario,  and  one  to 
provide  for  navigation  between  the  Hudson  and  Lake 
Champlain.  His  recommendations  concerning  educa- 
tion, a  subject  in  which  he  was  supremely  interested, 
led  to  the  appropriation  of  6,900  pounds  for  Columbia 
College  and  750  pounds  a  year  for  five  years  to  the 
same  institution  for  professors'  salaries;  and  1,500 
pounds  a  year  for  five  years  to  be  apportioned  by  the 
Regents  of  the  State  University  among  deserving 


1792]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  127 

academies.  Provision  was  also  made  for  the  appoint- 
ment by  the  Legislature  on  November  6  of  thirteen 
Presidential  Electors,  the  number  being  subsequently 
reduced  to  twelve  by  amendment  on  November  20, 
1792. 

The  Sixteenth  Legislature  met  in  special  session, 
according  to  the  action  of  its  predecessor,  on  November 
6,  1792,  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  Presidential 
Electors,  and  amended  the  act  and  completed  that  work 
on  November  20.  It  continued  in  session  thereafter  for 
other  legislation,  and  on  December  18  passed  a  bill 
apportioning  the  State  into  Congress  districts.  With 
the  intermission  of  a  recess  at  the  holidays,  it  prolonged 
its  meetings  until  March  12,  1793,  when  it  adjourne  I 
without  day. 


CHAPTER  VII 
CLINTON  AND  JAY 

GOVERNOR  CLINTON'S  fifth  term  was  draw- 
ing toward  its  close.  His  successor  was  to  be 
chosen  at  the  election  of  April,  1792.  Thitherto 
he  had  invariably  been  his  own  successor.  His  original 
election  had  been  practically  unopposed,  and  at  three 
subsequent  elections  he  had  been  returned  without 
serious  demur.  The  first  real  contest  had  occurred  in 
1789,  and  his  surprise,  resentment,  and  wrath  at  the 
impertinence  of  young  Alexander  Hamilton  in  organ- 
izing against  him  an  opposition  which  all  but  defeated 
him  knew  no  bounds.  He  was,  however,  too  wary  and 
wise  a  politician  not  to  take  warning  from  the  incident. 
He  realized  that  his  tenure  of  office  was  no  longer 
secure;  he  was  no  more  to  be  reflected  as  a  matter  of 
course,  but  must  fight.  During  these  three  years  of  his 
fifth  term,  therefore,  he  paid  close  attention  to  what  in 
later  years  would  have  been  called  "fixing  his  political 
fences,"  and  the  beginning  of  1792  found  him  ready  for 
the  fight. 

His  foes  also  began  their  preparations  well  in 
advance,  though  it  was  not  until  two  months  before  the 
election  that  their  plans  were  complete  and  their  candi 
date  was  named.  Their  first  thought  was  for  their 
former  candidate,  Robert  Yates,  but  despite  repeated 
pleadings  he  positively  declined  to  run.  He  wouh1 
support  whatever  candidate  the  Federalists  selected,  but 

128 


MKI.ANCTON    SMHH 

Melancton  Smith;  horn  in  Jamaica,  L.  I.,  of  Quaker  ante- 
cedents in  1724;  in  business  a  merchant;  member  of  first 
provincial  congress  in  New  York  City,  May  23,  1775;  sheriff 
of  Dutchess  county,  1777;  commissioner  for  detecting  ami 
defeating  conspiracies  against  the  government,  1777;  member 
of  continental  congress,  17S5-8S;  member  of  congressional 
committee  that  reported  in  1787  the  final  draft  of  the  ();  (fi- 
nance establishing  a  government  of  the  Western  Federal 
Territory,  popularly  known  as  the  Ordinance  of  Freedom  of 
the  Northwest  Territory;  representative  from  Dutchess 
county  in  the  Poughkeepsie  convention  for  ratifying  the 
Federal  constitution,  17S8;  member  of  assembly,  1792;  circuit 
judge,  1792;  elected  a  sachem  of  the  Tammany  Society  in 
1791,  when  Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman  was  grand  sachem ;  died 
in  New  York  City,  July  29,  179S.  the  first  victim  of  the  yellow 
fever  epidemic. 

This  portrait  was  made  from  his  only  known  portrait, 
which  was  in  pen  and  ink,  presumably  drawn  by  one  of  hi* 
associates  on  the  Ordinance  Coirmittee  and  found  in  an  old 
trunk  forty  years  after  his  death.  On  it  were  the  words: 
"Mr.  Smith — 17S7-C.  Congress." 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  129 

preferred  himself  to  remain  Chief-Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court.  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  the  great 
patroon,  was  the  next  choice,  and  was  repeatedly  asked 
to  accept  the  nomination,  but  he  too  declined.  Robert 
R.  Livingston  was  approached,  but  positively  refused  to 
let  his  name  be  considered.  A  strong  movement  was 
then  developed  for  Burr,  promoted  by  the  younger  men 
of  both  parties,  which  for  a  time  seemed  likely  to  suc- 
ceed. At  the  last  moment,  however,  Schuyler  and 
Hamilton  threw  all  their  influence  into  the  scale  and 
prevailed  upon  John  Jay  to  accept  the  nomination.  It 
will  be  recalled  that  he  had  been  suggested  in  1786,  but 
vetoed  the  movement,  and  that  in  1789  he  would  have 
been  the  candidate  instead  of  Yates  but  for  his  absorp- 
tion in  national  affairs.  Now  he  assented  to  Schuyler's 
and  Hamilton's  urgings,  though  on  condition  that  he 
should  not  resign  the  Chief-Justiceship  in  advance  of 
election.  He  was  nominated  at  a  Federalist  caucus  in 
New  York  on  February  13  and  again  at  a  mass-meeting 
a  few  days  later.  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer  was  nomi- 
nated for  Lieutenant-Governor. 

Two  days  after  the  Federalist  caucus  the  Anti- 
Federalists  met,  also  in  New  York,  and  renominated 
George  Clinton  and  Pierre  Van  Cortlandt  for  the 
places  which  they  had  filled  for  so  many  years.  Some 
further  efforts  were  made  by  Burr's  followers  to  place 
him  in  the  field  as  a  third  candidate,  and  there  is  little 
doubt  that  he  would  have  accepted  the  nomination  and 
become  a  candidate  had  it  not  been  for  his  consuming 
hatred  of  Hamilton.  A  cursory  canvass  of  the  situation 
indicated  that  his  support  would  be  drawn  more  largely 


130  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

from  Clinton's  than  from  Jay's  ranks,  and  there  was 
therefore  danger  that  his  candidacy  would  defeat  Clin- 
ton and  elect  Jay.  Unwilling  to  give  Hamilton  a 
chance  of  such  triumph,  he  finally  decided  not  to  run, 
and  made  a  public  announcement  to  that  effect  on 
March  15.  Thereafter  the  contest  was  squarely  between 
Clinton  and  Jay,  with  Burr  using  all  his  influence  and 
exertions  in  Clinton's  favor.  The  Livingstons  also 
threw  all  their  influence  on  Clinton's  side. 

During  the  legislative  session  a  serious  attack  was 
made  upon  Clinton  in  connection  with  the  sale  of  public 
lands.  At  the  establishment  of  its  independence  the 
State  was  the  possessor  of  more  than  seven  million  acres 
of  unimproved  land,  much  of  which  was  capable  of 
improvement  into  great  value.  In  1791  the  Legislature 
authorized  the  Commissioners  of  the  Land  Office  to  sell 
these  lands  in  such  parcels,  at  such  prices,  and  on  such 
terms  as  they  pleased.  It  was  obviously  little  short  of 
scandalous  to  give  such  unlimited  power  to  any  men, 
yet  it  was  done  without  serious  objection  and  with  the 
assent  of  both  parties,  so  great  was  the  eagerness  to 
encourage  immigration  and  settlement.  Now,  the  Com- 
missioners to  whom  this  enormous  transaction  was 
entrusted  were  the  Governor,  George  Clinton ;  the  Sec- 
retary of  State,  J.  A.  Scott;  the  Attorney-General, 
Aaron  Burr;  the  State  Treasurer,  Girard  Bancker;  and 
the  State  Auditor,  Peter  T.  Curtenius.  During  the 
year  1791  they  sold  5,542,173  acres  of  land  for  the  sum 
of  $1,030,433.  That  was  a  small  sum  for  so  large  an 
area,  averaging  little  more  than  eighteen  cents  an  acre. 
Worst  of  all,  however,  it  appeared  that  no  less  than 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  131 

3,635,200  acres  had  been  sold  to  one  man,  a  notorious 
speculator,  Alexander  McComb,  at  the  price  of  eight 
pence  or  sixteen  cents  an  acre,  to  be  paid  in  five  yearly 
instalments,  without  interest  and  with  a  discount  of  six 
per  cent,  on  all  payments  made  in  advance.  McComb 
was  afterward  sent  to  jail  for  this  cause. 

There  can  be  no  question  that  this  was  all  wrong. 
It  was  obviously  contrary  to  public  interest  to  dispose 
of  the  land  in  such  large  tracts,  to  men  who  were 
obviously  and  necessarily  speculators  and  who  would 
hold  the  land  unimproved  until  they  could  resell  at  a 
profit.  A  long  and  acrimonious  discussion  ensued  in  the 
Legislature,  in  the  course  of  which  it  was  pretty  directly 
charged,  or  at  least  insinuated,  that  the  Governor  and 
his  friends  had  been  personally  interested  in  the 
transactions  and  would  profit  from  them.  This  charge 
undoubtedly  lost  Clinton  many  votes,  although  it  was 
doubtless  entirely  without  foundation.  Burr  was  the 
only  one  of  the  Commissioners  whose  honesty  was  not 
above  suspicion,  but  not  even  against  him  could  cor- 
ruption be  proved.  Some  time  after  the  election,  Mr. 
McComb  went  before  the  Mayor  of  New  York  and 
made  affidavit  that  the  Governor  had  not  been  either 
directly  or  indirectly  interested  in  the  sales  of  lands  to 
him.  A  resolution  was  introduced  into  the  Legislature 
by  Colonel  Talbot,  of  Montgomery  county,  severely 
condemning  the  Commissioners  for  lack  of  judgment 
in  the  transactions,  though  not  imputing  dishonest  acts 
or  motives  to  them.  This  was  finally  defeated,  and  in 
its  place  was  adopted,  by  a  vote  of  30  to  25  in  the 
Assembly,  a  resolution  fathered  by  Melancthon  Smith 


132  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  U792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

approving  the  conduct  of  the  Commissioners.  Mr. 
Smith  was  a  man  of  the  highest  integrity  and  was 
unquestionably  sincere  in  his  act,  which  went  far  toward 
silencing  criticism  of  the  Commissioners.  Yet  his 
strong  personal  attachment  to  the  Governor  justifies  the 
assumption  that  a  part  of  his  aim  was  to  vindicate  that 
official  in  the  eyes  of  the  electorate  at  the  polling  which 
was  then  only  a  few  days  distant.  He  doubtless  believed, 
and  rightly,  in  Clinton's  integrity,  and  wished  to  vindi- 
cate it  against  unjust  aspersions;  but  we  can  scarcely 
believe  that  he  approved  the  judgment  of  the  Commis- 
sioners in  making  those  monstrous  sales  of  land  as  they 
did. 

The  campaign  was  conducted  with  all  possible  vigor 
on  both  sides,  and  with  a  regrettable  degree  of  acri- 
moniousness,  until  the  polls  closed  on  election  day. 
Nor  indeed  was  it  ended  then,  for  the  closeness  of  the 
result  led  to  a  bitter  after-election  contest  and  to  a 
lasting  belief,  often  expressed,  that  the  result  was  not 
honestly  declared.  The  law  at  that  time  required  the 
votes  to  be  canvassed  by  a  joint  committee  of  the  two 
houses  of  the  Legislature.  The  ballot-boxes  of  the 
various  polling  places  were  delivered  to  the  Sheriffs  of 
the  counties  and  by  them  transmitted  to  the  Secretary 
of  State,  who  in  turn  delivered  them  to  the  canvassing 
committee,  who  were  to  count  all  the  individual  ballots 
and  declare  the  result;  and  that  declaration  was  to  be 
final,  without  appeal.  It  is  probable  that  this  provision 
was  illegal  so  far  as  the  votes  for  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature were  concerned,  since  the  Constitution  followed 
the  ancient  rule  of  making  each  house  the  judge  of  the 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  133 

election  of  its  own  members;  but  it  was  valid  so  far  as 
votes  for  Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor  were 
concerned. 

The  canvassing  committee  met  on  the  second  Tuesday 
in  June,  1792,  to  be  confronted  immediately  with  a 
grave  technical  problem  as  to  the  validity  of  some  of 
the  ballots  before  them.  The  votes  of  Otsego,  Clinto'n, 
and  Tioga  counties  were  challenged.  In  the  case  of 
Otsego,  there  was  no  dispute  as  to  the  regularity  of  the 
election  or  the  identity  of  the  ballot-boxes  and  their 
contents.  But  it  was  pointed  out  that  the  Constitution 
provided  that  Sheriffs  should  be  appointed  annually, 
and  forbade  any  man  to  hold  the  office  of  Sheriff  for 
more  than  four  successive  years,  or  to  hold  any  other 
office  at  the  same  time;  that  Richard  R.  Smith  was 
appointed  Sheriff  on  February  17,  1791,  for  a  year 
expiring  on  February  18,  1792;  that  on  January  13, 
1792,  he  wrote  to  the  Council  of  Appointment  declining 
reappointment;  that  on  March  30  Benjamin  Gilbert 
was  appointed  Sheriff,  and  qualified  for  and  entered 
upon  that  office  on  May  1 1 ;  that  on  the  first  Tuesday  in 
April  Richard  R.  Smith  was  elected  Supervisor  of  the 
town  of  Otsego,  and  entered  upon  that  office  on  the  first 
Tuesday  in  May;  and  that  the  ballot-boxes  of  the 
county  were  delivered  to  Smith  as  Sheriff,  and  for- 
warded by  him  as  Sheriff  to  the  Secretary  of  State.  It 
was  contended  that  Smith  was  not  Sheriff  at  that  time, 
since  his  term  of  office  had  expired  on  February  18  and 
another  man  had  been  appointed  in  his  place,  and  he 


134  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

himself  had  accepted  another  office;  therefore  the 
ballots  had  not  been  delivered  to  and  transmitted  by  the 
Sheriff,  as  required  by  law,  and  should  not  be  counted. 

In  the  case  of  Tioga  county,  the  Sheriff  delivered  the 
box  to  a  special  deputy  who,  falling  ill  and  unable  to 
complete  his  journey,  delivered  it  to  his  clerk,  who  took 
it  to  the  Secretary  of  State;  wherefore  it  was  argued 
that  those  ballots  should  not  be  canvassed. 

In  the  case  of  Clinton  county  the  Sheriff  sent  the  box 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  by  the  hands  of  a  man  who  w ' 
not  his  deputy;  and  for  that  reason  it  was  argued  that 
those  ballots  should  be  rejected. 

On  the  other  hand  it  was  contended  that  there  was 
no  question  as  to  the  identity  or  the  integrity  of  the 
ballots,  and  that  therefore  despite  any  technical  irregu 
larity  in  the  manner  of  their  conveyance  they  should  be 
canvassed  and  the  clear  intent  of  the  voters  should  thus 
be  honored.  The  canvassers  were  divided  in  opinion, 
seven  being  in  favor  of  rejecting  the  ballots  of  the  three 
counties,  and  three  in  favor  of  accepting  them.  The 
great  importance  of  the  question  lay  in  the  fact,  which 
was  well  known,  that  the  result  of  the  election  for 
Governor  depended  upon  it.  If  the  votes  of  Otsego 
county  were  rejected,  Clinton  would  be  elected;  while 
if  they  were  accepted  and  counted,  Jay  would  be 
elected.  Clinton's  friends  on  the  canvassing  com- 
mittee, therefore,  led  by  Melancthon  Smith  and  Samuel 
Jones,  were  for  rejecting  the  ballots  of  the  three 
counties,  and  Jay's  friends,  led  by  Isaac  Roosevelt,  were 
for  accepting  them. 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  135 

The  committee  finally  resorted  to  the  extraordinary 
expedient  of  referring  the  question  for  decision  to  the 
two  United  States  Senators.  Rufus  King  gave  his 
opinion  in  favor  of  accepting  and  counting  the  votes,  all 
excepting  a  few  which  had  been  tied  in  a  bundle  to  the 
outside  of  a  box.  He  argued  in  the  Otsego  case  that 
Smith  was  probably  legally  Sheriff,  but  at  any  rate  was 
de  facto  Sheriff,  since  his  successor  had  not  yet  qualified 
at  the  time  of  the  delivery  of  the  boxes,  and  that  there- 
fore while  his  acts  beneficial  to  himself  might  be  void 
those  tending  to  public  utility  were  valid ;  that  the  votes 
from  Clinton  county  should  be  counted,  because  a 
Sheriff  could  deputize  by  parole;  and  that  those  from 
Tioga  county  should  also  be  counted,  because  while  a 
Sheriff's  deputy  might  not  make  another  a  deputy,  the 
election  law  should  be  construed  liberally  and  in  fur 
therance  of  the  right  of  suffrage.  Aaron  Burr,  on  the 
contrary,  held  that  the  Otsego  votes  should  be  rejected 
because  the  Sheriff  did  not  hold  over  under  common 
law,  and  there  was  no  hold-over  statute  in  his  favor  in 
New  York;  that  the  Tioga  votes  should  be  rejected 
because  a  deputy  could  not  make  another  deputy;  and 
that  the  Clinton  votes  might  be  counted  because  a 
Sheriff  might  make  a  deputy  by  parole. 

Upon  receiving  these  opinions  the  canvassing  com- 
mittee voted  upon  the  course  they  should  pursue. 
Melancthon  Smith  and  five  others  voted  to  reject  the 
ballots  of  all  three  counties,  while  the  other  four — 
including  Samuel  Jones,  the  ablest  lawyer  on  the  com- 
mittee and  a  supporter  of  Clinton — voted  for  their 
acceptance.  They  were  therefore  rejected  and,  the 


136  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

remaining  votes  being  canvassed,  Clinton  was  declared 
elected  by  a  majority  of  108  votes.  Had  the  rejected 
ballots  been  counted,  Jay  would  have  been  elected  by  a 
much  larger  majority. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  decision  of  the  can- 
vassers was  grossly  wrong.  It  confessedly  nullified  the 
undisputed  will  of  the  people,  and  it  did  so  on  the 
strength  of  technicalities  of  the  most  dubious  kind. 
Since  that  time  judicial  decisions  of  the  highest  author- 
ity have  been  exactly  contrary  to  the  arguments  of  Burr 
and  to  the  determination  of  the  majority  of  the  can- 
vassers. That  such  a  man  as  Melancthon  Smith  should 
have  made  himself  party  to  such  a  job,  and  indeed 
should  have  taken  the  lead  in  it,  is  a  melancholy  illus- 
tration of  the  power  of  factionalism  to  misguide  even 
men  of  the  purest  character.  It  is  not  surprising  that  a 
storm  of  indignation  swept  the  State.  Mass-meetings 
of  wrathful  protest  were  held,  and  outraged  passions 
were  with  difficulty  restrained  from  violence.  A  word 
from  Jay  would  have  plunged  the  State  into  civil  war. 
But  that  word  was  not  spoken.  On  the  contrary,  that 
illustrious  man,  with  a  patience  and  dignity  above 
praise,  counselled  moderation  and  emphasized  the 
necessity  of  obedience  to  the  laws.  It  would  have  been 
to  Clinton's  everlasting  honor  if  he  had  rejected  the 
finding  of  the  canvassers  and  demanded  the  counting  of 
ballots  which  he  knew  to  have  been  honestly  cast  and 
honestly  offered  for  counting.  But  he  did  not.  He 
acquiesced  in  the  result  as  a  matter  over  which  he  had 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  137 

no  control,  as  of  course  technically  he  had  not.  Legally, 
he  was  entirely  within  his  right.  Morally,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  acquit  him  of  grave  blame. 

Upon  nobody  in  the  whole  sordid  and  iniquitous 
business,  however,  did  so  much  culpability  fall  as  upon 
Burr.  We  may  absolve  Clinton  because  he  had  come 
almost  to  regard  himself  as  having  a  vested  right  to  the 
Governorship  for  life.  We  may  absolve  Melancthon 
Smith,  whose  blind  devotion  to  Clinton  misled  him 
more  than  once  or  twice.  But  Burr  was  inexcusable. 
He  knew  that  his  legal  opinion  was  deliberately  insin- 
cere and  false.  His  motives  were  sordid  and  corrupt. 
He  had  no  respect  for  the  suffrages  of  the  people.  He 
wanted  to  defeat  Jay  because  he  hated  him  and  still 
more  hated  Hamilton,  and  he  was  glad  to  bring  an 
indelible  smirch  on  Clinton's  title.  His  life-long  phil- 
osophy was  to  advance  his  own  interests  by  betraying 
and  destroying  the  interests  of  others.  It  is  not  the  least 
of  his  titles  to  infamy  that  he  was  thus  dominantly 
instrumental  in  bringing  this  first  great  reproach  upon 
the  integrity  of  the  government  of  the  State  of  New 
York. 

The  State  was,  moreover,  being  irresistibly  drawn 
into  that  vortex  of  alien  factionalism  in  which  the  whole 
republic  came  perilously  near  to  being  engulfed  and 
lost.  Instead  of  Federalist  and  Anti-Federalist  or 
Republican,  the  terms  "Anglican"  and  "Galilean"  were 
being  used  to  describe  the  two  parties;  the  latter  being 
applied  with  far  more  truth  than  the  former.  A  striking 
exhibition  of  this  spirit  was  manifested  at  a  great  public 
banquet  which  was  given  to  Clinton  shortly  after  his 


138  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

inauguration  for  his  sixth  term.  His  installation 
occurred  on  July  2,  and  on  July  19  the  banquet  was 
given  to  him  by  his  political  friends  in  New  York  City. 
The  venerable  Samuel  Osgood,  who  had  been  Post- 
master-General, was  toastmaster,  and  the  toast  list 
included  "The  Constitution  of  the  United  States," 
"General  Washington,"  "Thomas  Jefferson,"  and  "The 
French  Republic."  No  other  member  of  the  United 
States  government  was  mentioned,  and  no  other  foreign 
country.  At  that  time  the  French  Republic  had  not  yet 
been  proclaimed  nor  the  king  been  deposed! 

It  was  inevitable  that  Clinton,  in  these  circumstances, 
should  enter  upon  his  sixth  term  of  office  amid  intense 
and  unsparing  hostility,  not  of  the  mob  but  of  a  large 
part  of  the  best  element  of  the  State.  Many  of  his  own 
supporters  were  alienated  from  him,  shocked  at  the 
spectacle  of  his  benefiting  from  annulment  of  the  popu- 
lar will.  They  were  also  attracted  to  Jay  by  his 
demeanor,  which  would  have  been  worthy  of  Wash- 
ington himself.  "The  reflection  that  a  majority  of  the 
electors  were  for  me,"  he  wrote,  "is  a  pleasing  one. 
That  injustice  has  taken  place  does  not  surprise  me. 
.  .  .  A  few  more  years  will  put  us  all  in  the  dust, 
and  it  will  then  be  of  more  importance  to  me  to  have 
governed  myself  than  to  have  governed  the  State." 

The  Governor  began,  however,  to  improve  the 
political  opportunities  which  his  sixth  term  afforded 
him.  The  creation  of  several  new  counties  and  the 
growth  of  the  State  in  population  and  general  interests 
had  so  increased  the  business  of  the  Supreme  Courr  as 
to  overburden  the  three  Justices  with  labor,  and  the 


1792]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  139 

Council  of  Appointment  in  consequence  determined  to 
appoint  a  fourth  Justice.  That  body  was  at  this  time 
equally  divided  between  the  two  parties,  with  the 
Governor  as  president  casting  the  deciding  vote.  It 
was  therefore  practically  under  Anti-Federalist  control. 
On  October  2  it  voted,  by  virtue  of  Clinton's  vote,  to 
appoint  Aaron  Burr  to  the  bench.  But  he  was  then 
United  States  Senator,  and  upon  brief  reflection  he 
decided  that  the  latter  place  gave  him  far  greater  oppor- 
tunities for  political  activities  of  his  peculiar  kind  than 
the  Justiceship  would  do,  and  he  therefore  declined  the 
appointment.  Morgan  Lewis,  the  Attorney-General, 
was  then  appointed,  and  Nathaniel  Lawrence  was 
appointed  to  succeed  him  as  Attorney-General. 

When  the  Legislature  met  in  special  session  on 
November  6,  as  already  recorded,  to  choose  Presidential 
Electors,  the  controversy  over  the  rejected  ballots  of 
the  April  election  was  reopened.  The  Federalists  in 
the  Senate  objected  to  the  seating  in  that  body  of  John 
Livingston,  from  the  Eastern  district.  That  district 
comprised  Clinton  county,  the  ballots  of  which  had 
been  rejected.  It  was  argued  that  if  the  votes  of  Clinton 
county  had  been  counted  not  Mr.  Livingston  but 
Thomas  Jenkins,  his  opponent,  would  have  been 
elected,  and  that  while  the  canvassing  committee 
might  have  had  the  right  to  reject  votes  for  the  Gover- 
norship, the  Senate  itself  was  the  supreme  judge  of  the 
election  of  its  own  members  and  had  a  right  to  hold 
that  those  votes  were  improperly  rejected.  As  the 
ballots  had  been  burned — contrary  to  the  custom  which 
required  their  preservation — and  therefore  could  not 


140  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1792 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

now  be  counted,  the  election  should  be  annulled  and  a 
new  one  ordered.  Clinton's  friends,  however,  took  the 
extraordinary  ground,  in  defiance  of  the  Constitution, 
that  the  action  of  the  canvassers  was  finally  binding 
upon  the  Senate  and  that  Mr.  Livingston  was  therefore 
entitled  to  his  seat,  and  this  view  prevailed  by  a  vote  of 
12  to  11. 

A  few  days  later  a  company  of  about  eighty  men 
representing  nearly  all  parts  of  the  State  came  to  New 
York  and  were  introduced  to  the  Assembly  by  Josiah 
Ogden  Hoffman,  one  of  the  foremost  lawyers  of  New 
York.  They  declared  themselves  to  be  the  deputies  of 
the  people  of  the  State,  come  to  memorialize  the 
Assembly  for  an  investigation  and  redress  of  the  outrage 
which  the  majority  of  the  canvassing  committee  had 
perpetrated  upon  the  voters  of  three  counties  of  the 
State  and  therefore  upon  the  whole  State.  The 
memorial  was  received  and  was  referred  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,  and  ten  days  later  was  taken  up 
very  seriously.  Many  witnesses  were  examined  and 
their  depositions  were  entered  upon  the  journal  of  the 
Assembly,  the  case  being  conducted  for  the  memorialists 
by  Mr.  Hoffman  and  by  James  Kent,  afterward  the 
famous  Chancellor  of  the  State. 

While  this  inquest  was  in  progress,  Clinton's  friends 
presented  a  memorial  demanding  the  impeachment  of 
William  Cooper,  Judge  of  Otsego  county,  on  the 
ground  that  he  had  encouraged  illegal  voting  in  behalf 
of  Mr.  Jay,  causing  men  who  were  not  freeholders  to 
vote  and  preventing  lawful  electors  from  voting  by 
gross  intimidation.  This  memorial  was  also  received 


1793]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  141 

and  investigated  at  great  length,  but  no  adequate  ground 
for  the  impeachment  of  Judge  Cooper  could  be  found. 
In  the  end,  also,  the  Assembly  decided  not  to  regard 
favorably  the  other  memorial,  but  to  sustain  the  action 
of  the  majority  of  the  canvassing  committee.  The 
debates  and  investigations  were  a  purely  political  fight, 
the  first  of  its  kind  in  the  history  of  New  York.  It  is 
not  probable  that  either  party  of  memorialists  expected 
its  presentation  to  be  effective.  The  eighty  "deputies" 
and  their  distinguished  counsel  could  scarcely  have 
expected  the  Legislature  to  declare  the  counting  in  of 
the  Governor  to  be  null  and  void,  nor  could  the  other 
memorialists  have  expected  a  Judge  to  be  impeached 
for  acts  which,  however  improper  in  a  citizen,  did  not 
in  the  least  affect  his  conduct  on  the  bench.  The 
"deputies"  were  aiming  to  call  further  attention  to  a 
great  wrong  and  to  fix  reproach  upon  the  Governor  and 
his  partisans  who  were  the  beneficiaries  of  it,  as  a  warn- 
ing against  its  repetition,  while  the  petitioners  for 
impeachment  were  trying  to  divert  attention  from  that 
attack  upon  the  administration  by  "back-firing." 

The  net  result  of  this  agitation  was  decidedly  favor- 
able to  the  Federalists,  who  at  the  election  of  April, 
1793,  secured  overwhelming  majorities  in  both  houses 
of  the  Legislature.  The  Governor  had  no  occasion  to 
convoke  the  new  body  before  its  regular  meeting  time, 
but  during  that  summer  his  followers  reemphasized 
their  spirit  of  alien  faction  by  going  into  ecstasies  of 
enthusiasm  over  the  French  Minister,  Genet,  who  had 
arrived  in  this  country  and  had  begun  his  scandalous 
career  of  violating  neutrality  and  insulting  Washington. 


142  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1794 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  Anti-Federalists  of  New  York  received  him  with 
almost  hysterical  welcomes  and  adopted  resolutions  of 
sympathy  and  compliment.  The  Federalists  replied 
by  adopting  resolutions  commending  Washington  for 
his  wise  and  prudent  course  of  strict  neutrality  between 
the  European  belligerents. 

The  Seventeenth  Legislature  met  at  Albany  on  Janu- 
ary 7,  1794,  and  James  Watson  of  New  York  City  was 
elected  Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  The  Governor  made 
a  brief  opening  address,  in  which  he  obviously  strove 
to  avoid  controversial  politics.  He  referred  to  the 
European  war,  and  expressed  pious  desires  for  peace. 
He  however  betrayed  his  "Gallican"  sympathies  in  a 
somewhat  bitter  complaint  of  Great  Britain's  slowness 
in  surrendering  the  western  military  posts  as  stipulated 
in  the  treaty  of  peace ;  which  was  a  matter  pertaining  to 
the  national  rather  than  to  the  State  government.  His 
most  important  recommendation  was  for  a  revision  of 
the  criminal  code  which  would  make  it  less  blood- 
thirsty. The  death  penalty  was  then  prescribed  for  a 
great  number  of  offenses,  and  juries  were  unwilling  to 
convict  prisoners  and  subject  them  to  that  penalty  when 
they  would  have  convicted  them  for  a  more  reasonable 
sentence.  The  Governor  wisely  argued  that  certainty 
rather  than  severity  of  punishment  was  the  most  effec- 
tive deterrent  of  crime.  Unfortunately  the  Legislature 
did  not  act  upon  his  recommendations,  though  its  suc- 
cessor two  years  later  did  so. 

Immediately  after  the  delivery  of  the  address  and  the 
retirement  of  the  Governor  and  the  Senate  from  the 
Assembly  chamber,  the  political  conflict  between  the 


1794]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  143 

two  parties  was  renewed  in  a  peculiarly  significant 
manner.  Mr.  Hoffman,  the  leader  of  the  Federalist 
forces  in  the  Assembly,  moved  for  the  election  of  a  new 
Council  of  Appointment.  He  made  a  scathing  criti- 
cism of  the  existing  Counci'l,  declaring  its  further 
activities  to  be  a  menace  to  the  welfare  of  the  State, 
and  demanded  immediate  action.  His  motion  was 
seconded  by  Ambrose  Spencer  and  supported  by  several 
other  Federalists.  It  was  vigorously  opposed  by  a 
number  of  the  Governor's  friends,  who  recognized  it  as 
a  pretty  direct  attack  upon  him.  They  urged  what  was 
undoubtedly  true,  that  the  members  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment  were  constitutional  officers,  whose  tenure 
was  one  year,  and  that  the  Assembly  had  no  power  to 
remove  them,  save  by  impeachment,  before  the  end  ot 
the  year  for  which  they  had  been  elected.  If  another 
Council  were  at  that  time  elected,  they  insisted,  the 
existing  Council  would  still  continue  in  office  with  full 
power  until  the  end  of  its  constitutional  term.  They 
finally  proposed  that,  in  order  to  give  time  for  reflection 
and  to  permit  excited  passions  to  cool,  the  matter  be 
laid  over  until  the  next  day.  But  that  would  not  suit 
Mr.  Hoffman  and  his  followers,  who  insisted  upon  the 
choice  of  a  new  Council  that  very  evening.  The  old 
Council,  they  declared,  might  at  that  very  moment  be 
planning  mischief  in  the  appointment  of  a  Supreme 
Court  Justice  of  notorious  unfitness,  and  an  hour's  delay 
in  displacing  them  might  mean  irreparable  injury  to 
the  State. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  a  fourth  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  had  recently  been  appointed,  and  that 


144  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1794 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Council  had  first  offered  the  place  to  Burr.  It  was 
now  pretty  generally  conceded  that  a  fifth  Justice  was 
needed,  although  the  Governor  himself  was  not 
convinced  of  it,  and  the  Federalists  were  desirous  of  the 
appointment  of  Egbert  Benson,  whom  it  was  quite 
certain  the  existing  Council  would  never  choose.  The 
Council  was  supposed  to  favor  Peter  W.  Yates,  though 
there  is  ground  to  believe  that  the  Governor  himself 
was  opposed  to  him  though,  for  political  reasons,  not 
openly.  Now,  Mr.  Benson  was  doubtless  a  better  choice 
than  Mr.  Yates,  although  the  latter  would  not  have 
been  in  any  sense  discreditable;  but  the  division  of 
opinion  among  the  Anti-Federalist  members  of  the 
Council,  and  the  disinclination  of  the  Governor  himself 
to  make  any  immediate  appointment,  made  Mr.  Hoff- 
man's haste  for  action  appear  somewhat  uncalled  for. 
He  persisted  in  his  demand,  however,  and  the  result 
was  that  that  very  evening  the  Assembly  elected  a  new 
Council  of  Appointment. 

The  old  Council  had  consisted  of  Durand  Gelston, 
of  the  Southern  district,  Joseph  Hasbrouck,  of  the 
Middle,  and  Robert  Woodworth,  of  the  Eastern,  Anti- 
Federalists,  and  John  Frey,  of  the  Western,  Federalist. 
The  Assembly  elected  as  the  new  Council  Philip 
Schuyler,  Zina  Hitchcock,  and  Selah  Strong,  Feder- 
alists, and  Reuben  Hopkins,  Anti-Federalist.  Despite 
the  strenuous  opposition  which  had  been  manifested  to 
this  action,  and  despite  the  grave  doubts  of  its  consti- 
tutionality, no  serious  effort  at  further  resistance 


ALEXANDER  MCDOUGALL 

Alexander  McDougall ;  born  on  the  island  of  Islay,  Scot- 
land, 1731;  came  to  New  York  in  1755;  engaged  in  printing 
and  was  imprisoned  as  the  alleged  author  of  revolutionary 
documents;  served  in  the  war  of  the  revolution  until  its  close; 
delegate  to  the  continental  congress,  1780  and  1784-85;  mem- 
ber of  the  state  senate,  1784-86;  died  in  New  York  City,  June 
8,  1786. 


JAMES  DUANE 

James  Duane,  first  mayor  of  New  York  Citv;  born  in  New 
York  City,  February  6,  1733;  lawyer;  member  of  continental 
congress,  1774-84;  clerk  of  the  court  of  chancery,  1762-1776; 
member  of  the  revolutionary  committee  of  100,  1775;  delegate 
to  Annapolis  convention,  1786;  member  of  state  senate,  1782-85, 
1788-1790;  first  mayor  of  New  York  City,  1784;  delegate  to 
state  convention  to  consider  Federal  constitution,  1788;  United 
States  district  judge  for  district  of  New  York,  1789-94;  died 
in  Duanesburg,  Schenectady  county,  N.  Y.,  February  1,  1797. 


1782]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  81 

would  be  insufficient  for  a  time  to  meet  necessary  expen- 
ditures; and  that  therefore  "It  appears  to  this  Legisla- 
ture that  the  foregoing  important  ends  can  never  be 
attained  by  partial  deliberations  of  the  States  separ- 
ately; but  that  it  is  essential  to  the  common  welfare  that 
there  should  be  as  soon  as  possible  a  conference  of  the 
whole  on  the  subject;  and  that  it  would  be  advisable 
for  this  purpose  to  propose  to  Congress  to  recommend, 
and  to  each  State  to  adopt,  the  measure  of  assembling 
a  general  convention  of  the  States,  specially  authorized 
to  revise  and  amend  the  Confederation,  reserving  a 
right  to  the  respective  Legislatures  to  ratify  their  deter- 


minations." 


It  would  be  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  epochal 
importance  of  that  declaration.  Its  significance  must 
certainly  have  been  appreciated  by  the  members  of  the 
Legislature,  who  without  a  dissenting  voice  approved 
it;  and  also  by  Governor  Clinton  himself,  who,  by  order 
of  the  Legislature,  transmitted  the  resolutions  to  Con- 
gress and  also  to  the  Governor  of  each  of  the  other 
States.  It  was  a  pronouncement  of  which  much  was 
thereafter  to  be  heard  in  the  public  affairs  of  both  the 
State  and  the  Nation,  and  it  indubitably  and  indelibly 
marked  the  Empire  State  as  the  place  of  conception  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  After  its  adop- 
tion it  was  fitting  that  the  Legislature  should  adjourn. 
Any  further  transactions  at  that  session  would  have  been 
an  anti-climax. 

Kingston  was  selected  by  the  Governor  as  the  next 
place  of  meeting,  on  January  7,  and  was  thus  announced 
in  his  proclamation  of  November  12.  It  took  twenty 


82  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1783 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

days  to  secure  a  quorum,  and  then,  on  January  27,  1783, 
the  Governor  sent  in  a  message  calling  first  and  most 
urgent  attention  to  the  financial  requisitions  of  Con- 
gress. Taxation,  the  payment  of  troops,  and  troubles  in 
Vermont  were  other  salient  topics.  The  Governor 
referred  with  much  bitterness  to  "outrages  committed 
on  the  peaceable  subjects  of  this  State  by  persons  acting 
under  the  authority  of  the  usurped  government 
attempted  to  be  established  in  the  northeastern  part  of 
this  State."  The  Legislature  declared  it  to  be  imprac- 
ticable to  meet  all  the  financial  requisitions  of  the  Fed- 
eral government,  especially  by  exchanging  specie  for 
drafts,  but  it  took  some  action  looking  to  payment  of 
troops. 

Most  important  of  all  was  the  Governor's  transmis- 
sion to  the  Legislature,  on  March  8,  of  a  letter  from 
Governor  Hancock  of  Massachusetts,  conveying  a 
resolution  of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature  inviting  the 
appointment  of  Delegates  from  the  States  to  a  Conven- 
tion at  Hartford,  Connecticut,  to  be  held  on  the  last 
Wednesday  in  April,  "to  confer  on  the  necessity  of 
adopting  such  a  general  and  uniform  system  of  taxation, 
by  impost  and  excise,  as  may  be  thought  advantageous 
to  the  several  States  mentioned  in  the  resolution."  He 
also  transmitted  a  letter  from  Alexander  Hamilton 
discussing  Federal  relations  and  the  powers  of  Con- 
gress. It  was  decided  to  participate  in  the  Convention  at 
Hartford,  and  Ezra  L'Hommedieu,  Ephraim  Paine, 
and  John  Lansing  were  appointed  Delegates  to  it. 

The  Governor  transmitted  on  March  24  a  copy  of  the 
agreement  upon  provisional  terms  of  peace  between  the 


1783-4]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  83 

United  States  and  Great  Britain  which  had  been  arrived 
at  on  November  30,  1782,  and  on  March  28  added  fur- 
ther dispatches  announcing  "the  conclusion  of  the  pre- 
liminaries of  a  general  peace."  On  that  day  the 
Legislature  adjourned  subject  to  the  Governor's  call. 

There  was,  however,  no  further  need  of  the  services 
of  that  Legislature.  In  April  there  were  held  the  tri- 
ennial election  for  Governor  and  simultaneously  the 
annual  election  for  members  of  Assembly,  the  result  of 
the  former  being  the  practically  unopposed  return  of 
Governor  Clinton  for  his  third  term.  Meantime  great 
events  were  occurring.  The  war  was  giving  place  to 
peace.  On  September  3,  1783,  the  definitive  treaty  of 
peace  with  Great  Britain  was  signed,  and  on  November 
25  following  the  British  forces  evacuated  New  York 
City,  thus  redeeming  the  State  from  alien  occupancy 
save  for  some  military  posts  on  the  western  frontier. 
On  December  9  the  Governor  summoned  the  new 
Legislature,  the  Seventh,  to  meet  in  New  York  City  on 
January  6,  1784.  Despite  the  eagerness  which  members 
might  be  supposed  to  have  had  thus  to  reenter  the  place 
which  had  so  long  been  held  by  the  enemy,  a  quorum 
was  not  obtained  until  January  21. 

The  Governor's  opening  address  was  much  longer 
than  usual.  It  began,  naturally  enough,  with  expres- 
sions of  exultation  and  congratulation  upon  the  return 
of  peace  and  the  complete  establishment  of  American 
independence.  Then  it  dwelt  upon  the  imperative 
need  of  maintaining  the  public  credit,  of  paying  the 
soldiers,  of  restoring  the  commerce  of  New  York,  of 
providing  a  sinking  fund,  of  promoting  agriculture,  and 


84  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1784 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

of  providing  for  public  instruction.  Attention  was 
called  also  to  the  plans  of  Great  Britain  for  monopoliz- 
ing trade  with  the  West  Indies,  which  would  operate 
greatly  to  the  disadvantage  of  New  York,  and  to  the 
need  of  providing  suitable  compensation  for  public 
officials,  of  revising  the  militia  laws,  and  of  settlement 
of  public  accounts.  Upon  most  of  these  matters  action 
was  taken  by  the  Legislature,  in  the  matter  of  public 
education  the  University  of  the  State  of  New  York 
being  organized.  A  number  of  acts,  some  of  this  ses- 
sion and  some  of  the  preceding  session,  directed  toward 
the  penalization  of  British  sympathizers  and  loyalists, 
were  vetoed  by  the  Council  of  Revision  and  were  not 
repassed,  of  which  we  shall  hear  more  presently.  On 
May  12  the  Legislature  adjourned  subject  to  the  call  of 
the  Governor. 

That  call  was  issued  on  August  20,  and  it  summoned 
a  meeting  at  New  York  on  October  4.  A  quorum  was 
secured  on  October  18.  The  first  topic  in  the  Gover- 
nor's message  was  the  boundary  controversy  with  Mas- 
sachusetts, in  response  to  his  presentation  of  which  the 
Legislature  provided  for  a  commission  to  represent 
New  York  in  an  attempted  settlement,  its  members 
being  James  Duane,  John  Jay,  Robert  R.  Livingston, 
Egbert  Benson,  and  Walter  Livingston.  Later  Simeon 
DeWitt  was  also  appointed  a  Commissioner;  and  still 
later  Congress  was  authorized  to  appoint  Commis- 
sioners to  determine  and  mark  the  true  boundary  line. 

Other  topics  presented  by  the  Governor  for  consider- 
ation and  action  were  the  need  of  paying  the  arrears  of 
interest  on  the  public  debt,  the  evils  of  absentee  land- 


1785]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  85 

lordship,  the  need  of  taxation  reform,  of  a  better  budget 
system  and  of  codification  of  the  laws,  and  the  desir- 
ability of  amendment  of  the  act  establishing  the  State 
University.  Some  of  these  were  acted  upon,  and  others 
were  postponed;  and  on  November  29  the  Legislature 
adjourned  until  January  18,  1785. 

A  quorum  did  not  appear  until  January  27,  at  which 
time  the  Governor  brought  to  attention  another  bound- 
ary controversy,  with  the  State  of  Pennsylvania;  and  on 
March  7  an  act  was  passed  providing  for  the  ascertain- 
ment and  marking  of  that  line.  This  session  was 
notable  for  the  number  and  importance  of  the  veto  mes- 
sages which  came  from  the  Council  of  Revision.  One, 
on  March  9,  was  directed  against  a  bill  "incorporating 
the  several  tradesmen  and  mechanics  of  the  city  and 
county  of  New  York."  In  a  long  and  elaborate  docu- 
ment the  Council  argued  that  the  proposed  organization 
was  superfluous  and  unnecessary  for  charitable  pur- 
poses ;  that  its  dues  and  the  time  spent  at  meetings  would 
operate  as  taxes  upon  its  members,  which  would  induce 
them  to  resort  to  means  for  keeping  up  the  price  of 
labor  or  else  would  cause  them  to  find  themselves  under- 
wrought  by  others;  that  such  incorporation  would  give 
them  special  privileges,  destructive  of  the  principle  of 
equal  liberty;  that  the  by-laws  of  the  corporation  were 
made  in  a  measure  dependent  upon  the  municipal  cor- 
poration of  New  York,  wherefore  either  the  mechanics 
would  in  time  control  the  city  government  or  that  gov- 
ernment would  control  the  mechanics,  either  of  which 
results  would  be  pernicious;  that  a  precedent  would  be 
set  whereby  other  groups  of  men  would  be  entitled  to 


86  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1785 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK. 

like  incorporation  until  the  State  would  become  not  a 
community  of  free  citizens  but  "a  community  of  cor- 
porations composing  an  aristocracy  destructive  to  the 
Constitution  and  independency  of  the  State" ;  that  the 
act  purposed  to  incorporate  not  mechanics  and  trades- 
men generally,  but  only  forty-three  persons,  who  could 
control  the  body  as  a  close  corporation  dependent 
absolutely  upon  their  will;  that  these  forty-three 
persons  would  have  improper  power  over  the  other 
mechanics  and  tradesmen ;  that  they  would  have  powers 
which  might  be  used  for  the  injury  of  the  community; 
that  the  interests  of  the  State  required  that  industrious 
immigrants  should  not  be  confronted  with  such  hostile 
influences  as  this  corporation  might  exert;  that  the  cor- 
poration was  empowered  to  hold  property  to  an 
unlimited  amount  with  no  provision  to  prevent  the 
improper  use  of  it  or  make  the  corporation  accountable 
for  it;  and  that,  finally,  "experience  having  pointed  out 
no  inconvenience  in  leaving  the  mechanics  on  the  same 
footing  with  other  members  of  the  community,  the  bill 
holds  forth  no  object  sufficiently  important  to  induce  the 
change  of  a  system  under  which  they  have  happily 
prospered  for  a  series  of  years  in  favor  of  one  that 
presents  many  apparent  inconveniences,  and  which,  in 
its  operation,  may  be  more  extensively  mischievous 
than  human  prudence  can  at  present  foresee."  The  bill 
was  not  passed  over  the  tremendous  veto;  though  at  a 
later  date  the  Society  of  Tradesmen  and  Mechanics 
came  into  prosperous  and  beneficent  existence.  The 
veto  is  now  to  be  recalled  as  a  striking  reminder  of  the 


1785]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  87 

change  in  attitude  toward  such  organizations  which 
occurred  in  this  State  within  the  course  of  a  few  gen- 
erations. 

Another  veto,  on  March  23,  defeated  a  bill  for  the 
gradual  abolition  of  slavery,  because  that  measure 
disfranchised  the  freedmen  and  indeed  all  negroes  and 
mulattoes  in  the  State,  and  it  was  wisely  deemed  con- 
trary to  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence and  to  the  public  welfare  to  create  and  maintain 
a  considerable  class  of  inhabitants  who  were  not  and 
could  not  become  citizens. 

Another  veto,  on  April  6,  highly  interesting  to  recall 
at  this  time,  rejected  a  bill  "to  incorporate  the  German 
Society  for  encouraging  immigration  from  Germany," 
because  "it  will  be  productive  of  the  most  fatal  evils  to 
the  State  to  introduce  into  it  a  great  number  of 
foreigners,  differing  from  the  old  citizens  in  language 
and  manners,  ignorant  of  our  Constitution,  and  totally 
unacquainted  with  the  principles  of  civil  liberty,  under 
such  circumstances  as  will  naturally  tend  to  keep  them 
a  distinct  people  and  prevent  their  blending  with  the 
general  mass  of  citizens,  with  one  name  and  common 
interest." 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  April  27,  subject  to 
the  call  of  the  Governor.  Meantime  at  the  regular 
April  election  a  new  Senate — the  third — and  a  new 
Assembly — the  ninth — were  chosen.  On  November  16 
the  Governor  convoked  the  new  Legislature  to  meet  at 
New  York  on  January  6,  1786.  It  was  ten  days  after 
the  latter  date  when  a  quorum  was  secured  and  the 
Governor's  address  was  delivered.  He  suggested  to  the 


88  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1786 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Legislature  that  instead  of  always  awaiting  his  call,  it 
should  itself  provide  by  statute  for  a  fixed  time  of  meet- 
ing once  a  year,  as  it  was  obviously  its  right  to  do.  The 
proposal  was  acted  upon,  and  on  March  13,  1786, 
chapter  14  of  the  Session  laws  required  the  Legislature 
to  meet  annually  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  January,  unless 
the  Governor  for  some  special  reason  should  convoke 
it  at  an  earlier  date.  The  Legislature  might  on  adjourn- 
ment fix  its  place  of  next  meeting,  but  if  it  did  not  do  so 
it  should  meet  where  it  had  last  met.  The  Governor's 
address  was  largely  devoted  to  financial  matters  and  to 
the  desirability  of  promoting  agriculture,  industry,  and 
commerce. 

In  response  to  an  invitation  from  the  State  of  Vir- 
ginia, the  Legislature  appointed  Robert  R.  Livingston, 
James  Duane,  Egbert  Benson,  Alexander  Hamilton, 
Leonard  Gansevoort,  and  Robert  C.  Livingston,  or  any 
three  of  them,  Commissioners  to  meet  similar  Commis- 
sioners from  other  States,  "to  take  into  consideration  the 
trade  and  commerce  of  the  United  States — to  consider 
how  far  a  uniform  system  in  their  commercial  inter- 
course and  regulations  may  be  necessary  to  their  com- 
mon interest  and  permanent  harmony;  and  to  report  to 
the  several  States  such  an  act  relative  to  this  great  object 
as  when  unanimously  ratified  by  them  will  enable  the 
United  States  in  Congress  assembled  to  provide  for  the 


same." 


The  Legislature  voted  on  April  29  to  hold  its  next 
meeting  in  New  York,  and  on  May  5  it  adjourned— 
curiously  enough,  to  meet  on  the  first  Monday  in  Jan- 
uary, although  it  had  enacted  a  statute  prescribing  the 


1786-7]  FROM  WAR  TO  PEACE  89 

first  Tuesday  as  the  fixed  time  for  meeting.  At  the 
April  election  a  new  Assembly  was  chosen,  and  Gover- 
nor Clinton  and  Lieutenant-Governor  Van  Cortlandt 
were  reelected  for  their  fourth  terms  practically  with- 
out opposition.  There  was,  indeed,  some  inclination  on 
the  part  of  his  friends  to  put  John  Jay  forward  for  the 
Governorship,  but  he,  absorbed  in  national  interests, 
gave  no  encouragement  to  the  movement.  Yet  the 
incident  was  significant  of  the  beginning  of  party  divi- 
sions which  would  presently  develop  into  political 
controversies,  and  even  conflicts  and  animosities,  of  the 
most  intense  character. 

The  Tenth  session  of  the  Legislature  was,  according 
to  statute,  to  meet  at  New  York  on  the  first  Tuesday  of 
January,  1787.  A  quorum  was  not  secured,  however, 
until  January  13,  at  which  time  the  Governor  delivered 
his  opening  address.  He  reported  the  settlement  of  the 
Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania  boundary  disputes,  a 
settlement  which  was  ratified  by  the  Legislature  a  year 
later.  He  also  reported  several  Indian  treaties,  which 
also  were  acted  upon  in  the  following  year.  His 
recommendation  of  the  creation  of  a  new  county,  from 
a  part  of  Washington  county,  was  adopted,  and  the 
county  appropriately  named  Clinton  came  into  exist- 
ence in  1788.  He  announced  the  receipt  of  a  letter  from 
the  President  of  Congress  concerning  the  definitive 
treaty  of  peace  with  Great  Britain,  and  also  a  resolution 
of  Congress,  to  the  effect  that  no  State  could  of  right 
interpret,  explain,  or  construe  a  treaty,  or  restrain,  limit, 
impede,  retard,  or  counteract  its  operation  and  execu- 


90  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1788 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

tion ;  wherefore  all  State  laws  repugnant  to  this  treaty 
should  be  repealed.  The  Legislature  made  such  a 
repeal  in  February,  1788. 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  April  21  to  meet  at 
Poughkeepsie  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  January,  1788, 
unless  earlier  summoned  by  the  Governor.  It  was  not 
thus  summoned,  but  a  quorum  was  not  obtained  at 
Poughkeepsie  until  January  11,  1788,  when  the  Gover- 
nor made  his  opening  address  to  the  Eleventh  Legis- 
lature. The  chief  purport  of  that  address  was  to  lay 
before  the  Legislature,  without  recommendation  of  any 
kind,  the  report  of  the  Constitutional  convention  of 
the  States,  which  had  been  held  at  Philadelphia.  Clin- 
ton did  not  so  much  as  say  that  he  laid  that  report 
before  the  Legislature  for  such  action  as  it  might  deem 
fitting,  but  merely  for  its  information.  What  was  done 
in  that  matter  we  shall  see  in  another  chapter.  The 
Legislature  adjourned  on  March  22,  to  meet  at  Albany 
on  the  first  Tuesday  in  January,  1789,  unless  earlier 
called  together  by  the  Governor. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES 

IT  will  be  expedient  at  this  point  in  our  narrative  to 
recur  to  some  incidents  already  passed  by,  in  order 
to  appreciate  accurately  the  causes  and  circum- 
stances of  the  rise  of  political  parties  in  the  State  of 
New  York.  We  must,  of  course,  regard  such  a  develop- 
ment as  inevitable  in  every  considerable  commonwealth, 
but  the  causes  of  it  are  as  varied  as  the  States  in  which 
it  occurs.  We  have  seen  that  party  divisions,  if  they 
can  be  said  to  have  existed  at  all,  were  very  vague  at  the 
organization  of  the  State,  and  were  made  on  social  and 
personal  lines  rather  than  on  political  issues  and  prin- 
ciples. The  only  truly  political  division  was  between 
patriots  and  loyalists,  between  the  friends  of  American 
independence  and  the  sympathizers  with  British  rule, 
between  whigs  and  tories.  This  division  was  of 
course  intensely  marked.  It  was  not  merely  political; 
it  was  militant.  Between  the  two  parties  there  was  not 
merely  rivalry  but  enmity  and  hostility.  This  was  the 
case  to  a  certain  extent  before  the  organization  of  New 
York  as  an  independent  State.  It  became  the  more 
marked  after  that  event,  because  that  organization  was 
effected,  naturally,  by  the  patriot  party  alone,  which 
thus  came  into  exclusive  governmental  control  of  the 
State,  and  which  not  unnaturally  or  unreasonably 
thereupon  began  to  exercise  governmental  discrimina- 
tion against  the  other  party. 

91 


92  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

In  this  campaign  against  the  British  loyalists  the 
leader  was  Governor  Clinton  himself.  There  was  in 
all  the  United  States  no  more  devoted  patriot  than  he, 
albeit,  as  we  shall  see,  his  devotion  was  more  for  the 
State  than  for  the  Nation.  There  was  surely  no  one 
who  more  passionately  and  inexorably  hated  Great 
Britain  and  all  British  sympathizers.  He  has  been 
quoted  as  having  declared  that  he  would  "rather  roast 
in  hell  to  all  eternity  than  be  dependent  upon  Great 
Britain  or  show  mercy  to  a  damned  tory."  Nor  was 
that  mere  rodomontade.  In  his  official  conduct  as  Gov- 
ernor he  made  practically  manifest  the  spirit  which 
those  words  expressed. 

Among  the  earliest  acts  of  the  Legislature  under  his 
direction  were  laws  requiring  an  oath  of  allegiance  to 
the  State  not  only  as  a  condition  of  citizenship,  but  also 
as  a  condition  of  residence  within  the  boundaries  of  the 
State,  and  confiscating  and  ordering  the  sale  of  the 
property  of  all  who  had  "adhered  to  the  enemy."  This 
latter  meant  in  effect  the  confiscation  without  recom- 
pense of  the  estates  of  all  who  would  not  take  the  oath 
of  allegiance.  Some  of  the  most  extreme  of  these 
measures  were,  happily,  vetoed  by  the  Council  of  Revi- 
sion, but  under  those  which  remained,  and  in  too  many 
cases  under  an  "unwritten  law,"  the  harshest  of  treat- 
ment was  inflicted  upon  the  British  loyalists.  Thou- 
sands of  them,  whose  only  offense  was  their  unwilling- 
ness to  renounce  their  British  allegiance,  were  sum- 
marily driven  out  of  the  State,  were  sent  within  the 
British  lines  at  New  York  City,  or  were  permitted  to 
remain  within  a  certain  pale  under  heavy  bonds  not  to 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  93 

go  beyond  the  prescribed  limits.  Heavy  fines  were 
levied  and  long  terms  of  imprisonment  were  imposed. 
There  was  even  resort  to  physical  violence,  and  men 
were  flogged  and  coated  with  tar  and  feathers,  not 
alone  by  lawless  mobs  but  in  some  cases  with  the 
acquiescence,  if  not  at  the  initiative,  of  the  Governor. 
The  natural  result  of  this  strenuous  policy  was  to 
develop  party  divisions  among  the  patriots  themselves. 
On  the  one  hand  were  those  who  were  remorseless  in 
their  prosecution  and  persecution  of  tories;  who  had, 
it  must  be  confessed,  much  provocation  for  their  course 
in  the  acts  which  many  tories  committed  betraying  the 
patriot  cause,  as  well  as  in  the  outrages  which  tories 
and  their  Indian  allies  had  committed.  On  the  other 
hand  were  those  who  favored  a  more  moderate  and 
humane,  if  not  a  lenient,  policy,  on  the  quite  true 
grounds  that  only  a  certain  proportion  of  the  tories  were 
guilty  of  anything  more  than  passive  disapproval  of 
New  York's  independence,  and  that  it  would  be  a  grave 
material  injury  to  the  State  to  expel  so  large  a  part  of 
its  population.  During  the  war  and  for  some  years 
after  the  cessation  of  hostilities  the  former  party  was 
dominant,  and  the  culmination  of  its  ruthless  policy  did 
not  occur  until  1783.  At  that  time,  upon  the  evacua- 
tion of  New  York  City  by  the  British  garrison,  there 
was  a  wholesale  exodus  of  the  loyalists  who  had  found 
refuge  in  or  had  been  driven  into  that  city,  as  well  as  of 
many  others  from  other  parts  of  the  State.  There  is  no 
authentic  record  of  their  numbers,  but  estimates  range 
from  fifty  thousand  to  a  hundred  thousand,  the  latter 
figures  being  reported  by  Sir  Guy  Carleton.  Even  the 


94  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

smaller  number  would  denote  a  serious  depletion  of  the 
population  of  the  still  sparsely  settled  State.  The 
exiles  went  chiefly  to  New  Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia, 
where  at  St.  John  the  anniversary  of  their  landing  was 
long  commemorated,  and  where  they  and  their  descend- 
ants cherished  for  many  years  a  resentment  and  antag- 
onism toward  the  United  States,  and  especially  toward 
New  York,  amounting  to  positive  hatred. 

The  first  important  division  of  official  and  political 
sentiment  on  this  subject  was  manifested  on  March  25, 
1778.  At  that  time  the  Council  of  Revision  vetoed  the 
bill  providing  for  an  electoral  system,  to  which  we  have 
already  referred.  Among  the  reasons  for  this  action 
was  the  fact  that  the  bill  disqualified  and  incapacitated 
to  hold  office,  or  even  to  vote,  all  persons  who  had  since 
July  9,  1776,  acknowledged  the  sovereignty  of  Great 
Britain,  or  denied  the  authority  of  the  government  of 
the  State  of  New  York  or  the  independence  of  that 
State,  or  the  authority  of  any  of  its  preceding  Con- 
gresses, conventions,  or  committees,  or  who  should 
thereafter  make  any  such  denial.  This,  the  Council 
held,  was  ex  post  facto  legislation,  it  was  arbitrary  and 
unjust,  it  destroyed  all  benefit  of  repentance  and  possi- 
bility of  reconciliation  on  the  part  of  the  former  tories 
who  might  have  become  good  patriots,  because  the  dis- 
qualifications were  not  limited  to  take  place  only  on 
judicial  conviction  of  the  offenders,  and  because  the 
disqualifications  savored  too  much  of  resentment  and 
revenge  to  be  consistent  with  the  dignity  or  good  of  a 
free  people.  The  Legislature,  however,  repassed  the 
bill  over  the  veto,  and  it  became  law;  and  a  few  days 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  95 

later  it  also  passed  the  other  measure,  already  men- 
tioned, giving  the  Governor  power  to  expel  from  the 
State  persons  and  families  regarded  as  disaffected  and 
dangerous,  a  characterization  which  was  of  course 
readily  applicable  to  all  who  were  unwilling  to  take 
the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  State  of  New  York. 

A  similar  issue  was  raised  a  year  later  when,  on 
March  14,  1779,  the  Council  of  Revision  vetoed  a  bill 
"for  forfeitures  and  confiscations."  The  Council 
objected  to  one  clause  of  this  measure  because  it  confis- 
cated on  account  of  alleged  treason  estates  of  persons 
who  were  dead  at  the  time  of  its  enactment — the  estates 
thus  confiscated  being  such  as  they  had  possessed  on 
July  9,  1776,  but  which  had  since  been  inherited  by 
other  persons  who  might  be  perfectly  good  and  loyal 
citizens.  It  objected  to  another  clause  because  it  for- 
feited the  real  property  belonging  on  July  9,  1776,  to 
inhabitants  or  subjects  of  Great  Britain,  a  proceeding 
repugnant  to  justice,  inviting  reprisals,  and  capable  of 
much  abuse.  This  veto  was  effective,  the  Legislature 
not  repassing  the  bill. 

This  division  of  sentiment  and  policy  over  the  ques- 
tion of  dealing  with  tories  was  gradually  transformed 
into  a  much  more  marked  division  over  a  much  more 
serious  question,  the  first  great  and  fundamental  issue 
which  arose  in  the  politics  of  New  York,  and  an  issue 
which,  chiefly  originating  in  New  York,  became  fore- 
most for  many  years  in  the  politics  of  the  whole  United 
States.  This  was  the  question  of  the  relation  of  New 
York  to  the  other  States  and  to  the  Confederation;  in 
its  wider  application,  the  question  of  State  Rights  or 


96  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

National  Sovereignty.  There  was  perhaps  a  hint  at  it 
in  the  refusal  of  New  York  to  make  its  ratification  of 
the  Articles  of  Confederation  valid  until  all  other 
States  had  signed  them.  It  was  far  more  strongly 
marked  in  the  disapproval  which  Clinton  manifested 
toward  the  act  by  which  in  1781  the  Legislature  com- 
plied with  the  request  of  Congress  in  providing  that 
import  duties  at  the  port  of  New  York  and  in  the  entire 
customs  district  should  be  collected  under  the  super- 
vision of  Congress  and  turned  over  to  Congress  for  the 
treasury  of  the  Confederation.  To  the  Governor's 
mind,  those  revenues  belonged  to  the  State  of  New 
York  and  to  nobody  else,  and  the  fact  that  New  York 
was  the  port  of  entry  for  a  considerable  part  of  the 
other  States  did  not  alter  that  circumstance.  His  doc- 
trine, in  spite  of  his  reference  to  the  Articles  of  Con- 
federation as  a  "national  compact"  forming  a  "union" 
of  the  States,  was  that  the  relationship  among  the  States 
was  that  of  a  defensive  alliance  of  sovereign  powers. 
New  York  was  bound  to  aid  the  other  States  against 
the  British,  but  she  was  not  called  upon  to  give  them 
pecuniary  support. 

Congress  in  April,  1783,  adopted  resolutions  recom- 
mending it  to  the  States  as  "indispensably  necessary  to 
the  public  credit  and  to  the  punctual  and  honorable 
discharge  of  public  debts"  that  they  should  by  State 
legislation  give  to  Congress  the  power  to  levy  certain 
duties  on  imports,  such  revenue  to  be  applied  exclu- 
sively to  payment  of  principal  or  interest  of  public 
debts  contracted  for  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  and 
such  imposts  to  continue  for  not  more  than  twenty-five 


WILLIAM  DUER 

William  Duer;  born  in  Devonshire,  England,  March  18, 
1747;  attended  Eton  college;  served  in  Anglo-Indian  army; 
emigrated  to  the  Province  of  New  York,  1768;  located  in 
Washington  county,  where  he  was  judge,  colonel  of  militia, 
member  of  the  committee  of  safety,  and  leader  in  the  ante- 
revolutionarv  movements;  delegate  to  the  continental  congress, 
1777-78;  removed  to  New  York  City,  1783;  assisted  Alexander 
Hamilton  in  organizing  the  treasury  department;  died  in  New 
York  City,  May  7,  1799. 


FRANCIS  LEWIS 

Francis  Lewis,  signer  of  Declaration  of  Independence;  born 
in  Llandaff,  Wales,  March,  1713;  came  to  America,  1735  and 
established  mercantile  houses  in  New  York  and  Philadelphia; 
secured  contract  to  clothe  the  british  army  in  America,  1753; 
participated  in  French  and  Indian  wars  as  an  aid  to  Gen. 
Mercer;  captured  in  Oswego,  N.  Y.  by  forces  under  Mont- 
calm;  taken  prisoner  to  France  and  exchanged;  on  his  return 
the  colonial  government  gave  him  5,000  acres  of  land  in 
recognition  of  his  services;  delegate  to  the  stamp  act  congress 
in  New  York  City,  1765;  delegate  to  continental  congress, 
1775-79;  siener  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence;  died, 
New  York  City,  December  30,  1802. 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  97 

years.  The  duties  were  to  be  collected  by  State  agents, 
amenable  to  and  removable  by  Congress,  and  if  a  State 
failed  for  one  month  to  appoint  collectors  they  were 
to  be  appointed  by  Congress.  It  was  also  recommended 
that  the  Articles  of  Confederation  be  amended  so  as  to 
base  the  apportionment  of  war  expenses  upon  the  States 
according  to  population  rather  than  upon  property, 
which  change  was  made. 

New  York's  reply  to  the  first  of  these  recommenda- 
tions was  to  enact  a  law  granting  the  specified  imposts 
to  Congress,  but  retaining  for  the  State  the  entire  power 
and  supervision  of  collection,  though  Congress  was 
empowered  to  prosecute  collectors  for  neglect  of  duty 
in  the  State  courts.  This  was  unsatisfactory  to  Con- 
gress, and  in  August,  1786,  it  recommended  to  Gov- 
ernor Clinton  that  he  immediately  call  a  special  session 
of  the  Legislature  for  the  purpose  of  amending  the  law 
in  conformity  with  the  original  recommendations  of 
Congress.  This  Clinton  declined  to  do,  on  the  ground 
that  he  had  power  to  call  a  special  session  only  on  an 
extraordinary  occasion,  and  this  could  not  be  so 
regarded,  seeing  that  the  subject  had  been  before  the 
Legislature  at  its  last  session  and  had  then  been  acted 
upon.  Congress  retorted  by  reemphasizing  the  need  of 
a  uniform  system  of  impost  revenue,  by  pointing  out 
that  New  York  was  the  only  State  that  had  not  adopted 
the  plan  proposed  by  Congress  and  that  its  failure  to 
do  so  was  having  most  embarrassing  consequences,  and 
by  repeating  the  earnest  recommendation  for  immediate 
action  at  a  special  session  of  the  Legislature.  Clinton 
persisted  in  his  refusal  to  call  such  a  session,  but  in  his 


98  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

address  to  the  Legislature  at  the  opening  of  the  regular 
session  on  January  13,  1787,  he  referred  to  the  matter  in 
a  non-committal  way  as  something  deserving  of  atten- 
tion. The  result  was  the  enactment  in  April  of  a  new 
Customs  law,  still  maintaining  the  principle  that  the 
impost  was  to  be  collected  by  the  State  and  granted  by  it 
to  Congress,  instead  of  being  collected  by  Congress  as 
of  its  own  right.  This  was  of  course  not  satisfactory  to 
Congress,  but  Clinton  was  resolute  and  the  Legislature 
was  loyal  to  him,  and  the  matter  accordingly  remained 
in  statu  quo  until  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States.  The  controversy  accentuated,  however, 
the  party  differences  which  were  being  developed  in 
New  York,  there  being  an  increasing  number  of  those 
who  disagreed  with  Clinton's  policy  and  who  inclined 
toward  the  national  point  of  view. 

Mention  has  already  been  made  of  the  entry  of 
Alexander  Hamilton  into  the  political  activities  of  New 
York  and  of  the  nation.  He  had  been  too  young  to 
hold  office  or  to  vote  at  the  time  of  the  organization  of 
the  State, — he  did  not  attain  his  majority  until  1778,— 
though  he  was  old  enough  to  render  invaluable  services 
and  to  attain  distinction  in  the  Revolutionary  army.  He 
was,  we  must  remember,  only  twenty-four  years  old 
when  as  a  general  in  command  of  an  army  corps  he  led 
the  final  attack  upon  Yorktown  which  compelled  Corn- 
wallis  to  surrender  three  days  later.  But  despite  his 
youth  Hamilton  had  long  been  interested  in  State  and 
national  politics.  At  the  age  of  nineteen  he  had  pro- 
foundly considered  the  question  of  the  collection  of 
Federal  revenues  by  Federal  agents,  and  had  become 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  99 

convinced  that  such  was  the  only  sound  procedure.  He 
had,  of  course,  no  part  in  the  act  of  1781,  already  men- 
tioned, providing  for  collection  of  import  duties  under 
Congressional  supervision,  though  it  was  in  accord  with 
his  ideas,  but  two  years  later,  when  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
six  he  was  a  New  York  Delegate  in  Congress,  he 
earnestly  advocated  that  principle,  disapproved  the 
action  of  New  York  in  taking  for  the  State  full 
authority  over  collections,  and  was  influential  in  urging 
an  amendment  which  would  give  supervisory  power  to 
Congress. 

In  this  Hamilton  was  directly  in  opposition  to 
Clinton.  That  opposition  appeared  also  in  his  legal 
activities  in  New  York  City.  Establishing  himself 
there  in  1782,  he  quickly  acquired  an  important  prac- 
tice, largely  as  the  advocate  of  tolerance  in  the  treat- 
ment of  British  subjects  and  loyalists  and  as  the 
defender  of  their  legal  rights.  In  this  he  was  of  course 
moved  by  no  sympathy  with  toryism  or  lack  of 
patriotism,  but  by  such  just  and  enlightened  motives  as 
those  which  caused  the  Council  of  Revision  to  veto  some 
of  the  disfranchising  and  confiscatory  acts  of  the 
Legislature.  It  is  of  curious  interest  to  recall,  too,  that 
he,  who  has  commonly  been  regarded  as  inclining 
toward  aristocracy  or  oligarchy  rather  than  democracy, 
based  his  argument  against  these  extreme  measures  on 
the  ground  of  democracy.  "If  the  Legislature  can  dis- 
franchise at  pleasure,"  he  said,  "it  may  soon  confine  all 
the  votes  to  a  small  number  of  partisans,  and  establish 
an  aristocracy  or  an  oligarchy.  If  it  may  banish  at 
discretion,  no  man  can  be  safe."  Therefore  he  depre- 


100  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

cated  the  creation,  through  indulgence  in  momentary 
passion,  of  precedents  and  principles  which  might  later 
prove  fatal  to  free  government. 

Despite  these  radical  differences,  Clinton  and  Ham- 
ilton for  some  time  seemed  to  be  in  substantial  accord. 
Indeed,  they  cooperated  on  the  very  matter  of  the 
powers  of  the  Federal  government  on  which  they  ulti- 
mately came  to  loggerheads  and  fought  the  first  great 
battle  in  New  York  politics.  As  early  as  1780  Clinton 
had  complained  to  the  Legislature  of  the  lack  of  power 
of  the  Federal  government.  In  his  opening  address  to 
the  Fourth  session,  on  September  7  of  that  year,  he  said  : 

"It  is  evident  that  our  embarrassments  in  the  prose- 
cution of  the  war  are  chiefly  to  be  attributed  to  a  defect 
in  power  in  those  who  ought  to  exercise  a  supreme 
direction,  for  while  Congress  can  only  recommend  and 
the  different  States  deliberate  upon  the  propriety  of  the 
recommendation,  we  cannot  expect  a  union  of  force  or 
counsel.  From  this  conviction  I  take  the  liberty  of 
submitting  to  you  whether  further  means  ought  not  to 
be  devised  for  accelerating  the  proposed  confederation, 
and  thereby  vesting  Congress  with  such  authority  as 
that  in  all  matters  which  relate  to  the  war  their  requi- 
sitions may  be  peremptory.  It  is  with  pleasure  I  find 
this  to  have  been  the  sentiment  of  a  convention  of  com- 
mittees from  three  States  lately  held  at  Boston." 

As  a  result  of  the  Legislature's  consideration  of  the 
matter  thus  presented  to  it  by  Clinton,  Philip  Schuyler, 
John  Sloss  Hobart,  and  Egbert  Benson  were  appointed 
Commissioners  to  represent  New  York  at  a  Convention 
to  be  held  at  Hartford,  Connecticut,  in  November,  1780, 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  101 

with  authority  to  propose  and  to  recommend  "all  such 
measures  as  shall  appear  calculated  to  give  a  vigor  to 
the  governing  powers  equal  to  the  present  crisis."  They 
accordingly  secured  the  adoption  of  a  recommendation 
empowering  Congress  to  levy  taxes  upon  the  States  in 
proportion  to  their  population,  which  was  approved  by 
the  New  York  Legislature  on  March  29,  1781.  In  this 
Clinton  cordially  acquiesced,  as  he  did  also  in  the 
unanimous  adoption  by  the  Legislature  in  1782  of  the 
supremely  important  resolution  drafted  by  Hamilton, 
which  we  have  already  quoted,  calling  for  an  increase 
of  the  powers  of  Congress  and  suggesting  the  holding 
of  a  general  Convention  of  the  States  for  the  purpose 
of  revising  and  amending  the  Constitution.  Reference 
has  already  been  made  to  Clinton's  mention  of  the 
Articles  of  Confederation  as  a  "national"  compact.  It 
may  be  added  that  in  transmitting  to  the  Legislature  in 
1784  the  memorable  appeal  of  Washington  for  a 
stronger  Federal  government,  Clinton  said,  in  his  open- 
ing address  on  January  21 : 

"Viewing  the  blessings  we  now  enjoy  as  effects  flow- 
ing from  our  union,  you  cannot  but  be  attentive  to  every 
measure  which  has  a  tendency  to  cement  it,  and  to  give 
that  energy  to  our  national  councils  which  may  be 
necessary  to  the  general  welfare." 

The  earlier  of  these  utterances  in  favor  of  a  stronger 
Federal  authority  may  be  interpreted  as  referring 
solely  to  the  exigencies  of  the  war,  as  indeed  some  of 
them  obviously  did.  But  the  last  quoted  certainly  had 
reference  to  permanent  arrangements  in  time  of  peace. 
It  would,  however,  be  quite  unwarranted  to  charge 


102  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Clinton  with  bad  faith  or  inconsistency  in  taking  the 
attitude  and  making  the  utterances  thus  described,  and 
then  a  little  later  vigorously  opposing  the  new  Consti- 
tution. There  was  nothing  in  his  record  committing 
himself  to  anything  like  the  surrender  of  State  rights  to 
national  sovereignty  which  that  instrument  involved. 
It  does,  however,  seem  plausible  and  not  unjust  to  sup- 
pose that  having  been  elected  Governor  of  New  York 
four  times  with  practically  no  opposition,  and  having 
a  keen  appreciation  of  the  paramount  importance  of 
New  York  among  the  States,  he  began  involuntarily  to 
feel  a  sort  of  autocratic  proprietorship  in  the  Empire 
State,  and  reckoned  it  preferable  for  it  to  be  by  far  the 
strongest,  richest,  and  greatest  among  a  group  of  inde- 
pendent commonwealths,  reserving  for  itself  all  its 
resources  and  revenues  in  order  to  maintain  that  status, 
than  to  be  merely  the  richest  part  of  a  unified  nation, 
giving  of  its  wealth  and  strength  to  the  other  parts 
thereof. 

Whatever  his  motive,  he  soon  parted  political  com- 
pany with  Hamilton.  A  breach  in  their  relations 
occurred  in  1786.  In  that  year  Congress  summoned  a 
Convention  of  the  States  at  Annapolis  to  consider  ways 
and  means  for  the  regulation  of  commerce,  and  the 
Delegates  from  New  York  were  Egbert  Benson  and 
Alexander  Hamilton.  The  calling  of  that  Convention 
was  due  in  some  measure  to  the  action  which  the  New 
York  Legislature  had  taken  at  Hamilton's  suggestion 
and  with  Clinton's  concurrence,  and  the  most  important 
act  of  the  Convention  was  the  adoption  of  a  set  of 
resolutions  proposed  by  Hamilton.  These  resolutions 


THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  103 

were  identical  with  those  which  he  had  got  the  New 
York  Legislature  to  adopt  unanimously  four  years 
before,  declaring  the  government  of  the  Confederation 
inefficient  and  calling  for  a  Convention  to  revise  and 
amend  the  Constitution.  These  were,  as  we  have  said, 
adopted  by  the  Annapolis  Convention,  and  were  the  sure 
precursors  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  But 
when  they  were  referred  back  to  the  New  York  Legis- 
lature for  ratification,  that  body,  under  Clinton's 
influence,  rejected  them.  Obviously,  there  had  been  a 
change  between  1782  and  1786. 

The  movement  for  radical  revision  of  the  Articles 
of  Confederation  was  not,  however,  to  be  stayed. 
Indeed,  Clinton  and  all  others  were  in  favor  of  it,  the 
difference  of  opinion  being  as  to  the  extent  to  which  the 
changes  should  go.  The  Legislature  refused  to  approve 
Hamilton's  resolutions  in  1786  because  Clinton — quite 
correctly — conceived  that  Hamilton  was  aiming  at  an 
entirely  new  Constitution  which  would  subordinate  the 
States  to  the  Nation.  But  when  the  next  year  a  resolu- 
tion was  introduced  into  the  Legislature  instructing  the 
New  York  Delegates  in  Congress  to  vote  for  a  Conven- 
tion, it  passed  with  Clinton's  approval,  and  the  Gover- 
nor manifested  his  broadness  of  mind  by  assenting  to 
the  election  of  Hamilton  as  one  of  New  York's  three 
Delegates  to  that  Convention.  Nevertheless,  he  saw  to 
it  that  the  other  two  were  Robert  Yates  and  John 
Lansing,  Jr.,  two  of  the  strongest  supporters  of  State 
rights  and  strongest  opponents  of  anything  tending  to 
sacrifice  them  to  national  sovereignty.  Also,  the  Dele- 
gates were  elected  and  commissioned  "for  the  sole  pur- 


104  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  n787 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

pose  of  revising  the  Articles  of  Confederation."  Appar- 
ently no  chance  was  left  for  any  such  work  as  that 
which  the  indomitable  Hamilton  did  in  fact  achieve. 

We  need  not  here  enter  into  the  details  of  the  Consti- 
tutional convention,  which  belong  to  the  history  of  the 
nation  rather  than  to  that  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
Robert  Yates  was  opposed  to  a  national  Union  which 
should  have  a  government  of  its  own  superior  to  those 
of  the  States,  but  he  proposed  no  definite  plan  of 
improvement  upon  the  existing  Confederation.  John 
Lansing  very  explicitly  favored  a  plan  proposed  by  the 
New  Jersey  Delegates,  which  merely  amended  the 
Articles  of  Confederation  and  left  supreme  authority 
in  a  Congress  in  which  the  States  all  had  equal  repre- 
sentation. Hamilton,  though  at  first  doubting  whether 
it  had  sufficient  strength,  finally  supported  Madison's 
"Virginia  plan,"  looking  to  the  abandonment  of  the 
Articles  of  Confederation  and  the  making  of  a  new 
Constitution  under  which  there  would  be  a  national 
government  superior  to  and  separate  from  the  govern- 
ments of  the  States.  As  soon  as  it  was  evident  that  a 
majority  of  the  Convention  would  support  that  plan,  and 
that  it  would  be  adopted,  Yates  and  Lansing  withdrew 
from  the  Convention  and  refused  afterward  to  sign  the 
completed  Constitution.  The  ground  which  they  took 
was  that  to  do  otherwise  would  be  to  violate  their 
instructions  from  the  Legislature,  which  were,  as 
already  noted,  to  do  nothing  but  revise  the  Articles  of 
Confederation.  In  that  they  were  technically  right, 
and  they  were  heartily  supported  and  approved  by 
Governor  Clinton.  The  effect  of  their  withdrawal  was 


1787]  THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  105 

to  leave  New  York  without  a  vote  in  the  Convention, 
since  the  vote  of  a  State  could  be  cast  only  by  a  majority 
of  its  Delegates,  and  Hamilton,  standing  alone,  was  a 
minority  of  them.  Hamilton  was  permitted  by  the 
Convention,  however,  to  sign  the  Constitution,  which 
morally  he  was  more  entitled  to  do  than  any  other  man 
in  the  world. 

On  his  return  to  New  York,  Hamilton  found  himself 
bitterly  disapproved  and  discredited,  not  alone  by 
Clinton  and  other  political  leaders,  but  probably  by  a 
majority  of  the  people.  The  Governor  rebuked  him  to 
his  face  for  doing  something  which  the  State  had  not 
authorized  him  to  do,  and  his  friend  Richard  Morris, 
the  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  said  sadly, 
"You  will  find  yourself  in  a  hornets'  nest."  Nor  was 
that  foreboding  exaggerated.  The  draft  of  the  Consti- 
tution was  sent  by  Congress  on  September  28,  1787,  to 
the  Legislatures  of  the  various  States,  by  nine  of  which 
it  would  have  to  be  ratified  before  it  became  valid.  In 
New  York  it  was  received  with  both  vocal  and  manual 
violence.  People  denounced  it  as  a  "triple-headed 
monster."  Friends  quarreled  over  it  and  came  to 
physical  blows.  Mobs  were  organized  and  riots  raged 
in  city  streets.  A  political  party,  calling  itself  Federal 
Republican,  was  organized,  the  first  regularly  organ- 
ized political  party  in  the  State.  Its  object  was  to  defeat 
what  was  declared  to  be  "a  deep  and  wicked  conspiracy 
against  the  liberties  of  a  free  people,"  and  to  that  end 
it  sought  cooperation  with  political  leaders  in  other 
States,  with  the  purpose  of  organizing  a  national — or 
rather  an  interstate — movement. 


106  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1788 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  real  leader  of  this  opposition  to  the  Constitution 
was  Governor  Clinton,  and  his  chief  aids  were  Robert 
Yates,  John  Lansing,  Jr.,  Samuel  Jones,  and 
Melancthon  Smith ;  the  last  named  being  perhaps  the 
most  effective  of  them  all.  Hamilton,  of  course,  was 
the  chief  protagonist  of  the  Constitution.  By  his  side, 
with  eager  zeal,  came  John  Jay,  who  probably  exulted 
in  Hamilton's  alleged  violation  of  the  instructions  of 
the  Legislature,  in  memory  of  the  way  in  which,  to 
secure  the  treaty  of  peace  with  England,  a  few  years 
before  he  had  led  his  two  colleagues  at  Paris  in  throw- 
ing to  the  winds  the  still  more  imperative  instructions 
of  Congress.  There  came  to  the  same  side,  too,  such 
powerful  aids  as  Robert  R.  Livingston,  the  Chancellor; 
James  Duane,  Mayor  of  New  York;  Richard  Morris, 
John  Sloss  Hobart,  and  Richard  Harrison. 

All  these  were  among  the  members  of  the  State 
Convention  which  was  held  at  Poughkeepsie,  begin- 
ning on  June  17,  1788,  to  consider  the  Constitution. 
The  Governor  had  merely  mentioned  the  subject  in  the 
most  formal  and  colorless  way  in  his  opening  address  to 
the  Legislature  in  January,  1788,  and  was  doubtless 
opposed  to  the  holding  of  such  a  Convention  and  to  any 
formal  consideration  of  the  Constitution,  although  four 
States  had  already  ratified  it  and  three  others  were 
considering  it.  He  probably  hoped  that  it  would  be 
ratified  by  nine  States  without  New  York.  In  that  case 
a  Federal  Union  would  be  formed  of  which  New  York 
would  not  be  a  member.  If  the  scheme  proved  a  failure, 
as  he  confidently  expected,  New  York  would  be  well 
out  of  it.  If  it  proved  a  success,  New  York  could  gain 


1788]  THE  RISE  OF  PARTIES  107 

admission  at  a  later  date.  The  Union  would  always  be 
glad  to  welcome  so  great  a  State  as  New  York,  which 
indeed  geographically  would  divide  the  Union  into  two 
parts.  If  not,  New  York  was  great  enough  to  get  along 
alone. 

Although  the  Governor  thus  refrained  from  laying 
the  matter  before  the  Legislature,  that  body  finally  took 
it  up.  This  was  done  at  the  instance  of  Egbert  Benson, 
who  moved  the  calling  of  a  State  Convention  to  act 
upon  it.  This  motion  was  opposed  by  Clinton's  fol- 
lowers, but  finally  prevailed  through  Benson's  patriotic 
persistence.  In  the  Convention  the  leaders  of  the  two 
sides  were  Hamilton  and  Melancthon  Smith.  It  was  a 
battle  royal  between  two  men  of  masterful  ability.  On 
July  1 1  John  Jay  moved  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu- 
tion without  amendment;  provided,  however,  that 
amendments  might  be  recommended.  A  few  days 
later  Melancthon  Smith  declared  that  Hamilton's 
arguments  had  converted  him  to  the  side  of  the  Consti- 
tution. That  practically  ended  the  contest.  Governor 
Clinton,  who  was  a  member  and  president  of  the  Con- 
vention, privately  advised  his  friends  to  yield  and  to 
vote  for  ratification.  On  July  28  the  vote  was  taken 
on  Jay's  resolution  changed  so  as  to  read  "that  the 
Constitution  be  ratified  in  full  confidence  that  the 
amendments  proposed  by  this  Convention  will  be 
adopted."  The  vote  was  thirty  ayes  to  twenty-seven 
nays.  Clinton  declined  to  vote,  and  three  other  mem- 
bers were  not  recorded.  The  thirty  affirmative  votes 
were  therefore  one  short  of  a  majority  of  the  Conven- 
tion, which  had  sixty-one  members;  but  they  were  a 


108  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1788 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

majority  of  all  that  were  cast.  Had  the  vote  been  taken 
at  the  opening  of  the  Convention,  it  would  have  stood 
two-thirds  against  the  Constitution. 

This  was  the  greatest  defeat  that  Clinton  had  thus 
far  suffered  in  his  political  career;  indeed,  the  first 
that  he  considerably  took  to  heart.  He  had,  it  is 
true,  been  defeated  in  some  of  his  policies  against  the 
British  loyalists.  He  had  been  compelled  to  yield  to 
Congress  the  power  to  regulate  the  commerce  of  the 
States.  But  those  were  minor  matters  compared  with 
this,  which  at  a  stroke  reduced  him  from  being  the 
elected  sovereign  of  an  independent  State  to  being  the 
Governor  of  one  of  the  members  of  a  Nation  with  a 
national  government  supreme  above  him.  All  these 
defeats,  moreover,  had  been  inflicted  upon  him  by  the 
same  man,  a  young  man  who  had  been  a  child  in  arms 
when  he  was  a  conspicuous  officer  in  the  French  and 
Indian  War,  and  had  been  still  too  young  to  vote  either 
for  or  against  him  when  he  was  first  elected  Governor 
of  New  York.  Thereafter  there  was  war  between 
them;  a  war  which  for  years  dominated  the  politics 
of  the  State,  materially  affected  and  indeed  dominated 
the  politics  of  the  nation,  and  made  a  deeper  lasting 
impress  upon  American  history  than  any  other  occur- 
rence of  that  time. 


CHAPTER  VI 
UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION 

THE  vote  of  New  Hampshire  on  June  21,  1788, 
made  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  valid, 
five  weeks  before  New  York  accepted  that  instru- 
ment The  latter  State  was  therefore  not,  strictly 
speaking,  a  charter  member  of  the  United  States  under 
the  Constitution,  but  was  admitted  after  the  Union  had 
been  formed.  The  same  was  true  of  Virginia,  which 
ratified  the  Constitution  four  days  later  than  New 
Hampshire,  and  of  North  Carolina  and  Rhode  Island, 
which  postponed  the  act  for  several  months.  Moreover, 
having  thus  delayed  acceptance  of  the  Constitution, 
New  York  also  delayed  placing  herself  fully  under  its 
provisions.  The  ratification  of  the  Constitution  was 
perfected  and  proclaimed  by  the  moribund  Continental 
Congress  at  New  York  on  July  14,  and  an  order  was 
issued  for  putting  it  into  effect  by  the  various  States. 
On  July  28,  as  we  have  seen,  the  New  York  Convention 
ratified  the  Constitution.  But  it  was  not  until  October 
13,  1788,  that  Governor  Clinton  summoned  the  Twelfth 
Legislature  to  meet  at  Albany  to  take  action  upon  it, 
and  he  set  the  date  of  the  meeting  as  late  as  December  8. 
It  was  not  until  December  1 1  that  a  quorum  was 
secured. 

In  his  opening  address  Clinton  said  that  he  had  called 
the  special  session  in  order  to  lay  before  it  the  report  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Constitutional  convention  at 

109 


HO  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1788-9 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Poughkeepsie,  more  than  four  months  before,  and  also 
the  action  of  Congress.  He  of  course  fully  acquiesced 
in  what  had  been  done,  but  he  urged  that  New  York 
should  be  insistent  and  resolute  in  demanding  the  adop- 
tion of  the  amendments  to  the  Constitution,  without 
assurance  of  which  the  State  would  not  have  voted  for 
ratification.  In  a  subsequent  special  message  he 
expressed  regret  that  he  could  not  have  called  the 
Legislature  together  in  time  to  have  it  provide  for  the 
popular  election  of  Presidential  Electors.  Since  that 
could  not  be  done,  he  recommended  that  the  Legislature 
appoint  them  in  a  way  which  should  most  closely 
approximate  election  by  the  people.  Congress  had 
designated  the  first  Wednesday  in  January,  which 
would  be  January  7,  for  the  appointment  or  election  of 
Electors,  and  the  first  Wednesday  in  February  for  the 
meetings  of  the  Electors  for  their  choice  of  the  Presi- 
dent. New  York  was  entitled  to  eight  Electors. 
Accordingly  on  December  18  the  Senate  passed  a  bill 
providing  for  the  choice  of  four  Electors  by  itself,  and 
four  by  the  Assembly.  This  the  Assembly  rejected,  and 
it  passed  instead  a  bill  providing  for  the  nomination  of 
eight  candidates  by  each  house  and  then  the  election  of 
eight  by  the  two  houses  in  joint  session.  This  the  Senate 
rejected,  and  nothing  more  was  done  until  January  5, 
when  a  conference  of  the  two  houses  was  held,  with  no 
result.  The  day  set  for  choice  of  Electors  was  only  two 
days  off,  and  no  method  of  choosing  them  had  been 
adopted.  Finally  on  January  7  the  Senate  repassed  its 
former  bill,  and  the  Assembly  again  rejected  it;  and 
the  Assembly  repassed  its  former  bill,  and  the  Senate 


1789]  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  111 

rejected  it.  The  result  was  that  New  York,  having  had 
none  but  an  ex  post  facto  part  in  the  adoption  of  the 
national  Constitution,  had  no  part  whatever  in  the 
first  election  of  a  President  of  the  United  States.  A 
similar  disagreement  between  the  two  houses  of  the 
Legislature  prevented  the  election  of  United  States 
Senators,  so  that  New  York  was  unrepresented  in  that 
body  at  the  first  session  of  the  United  States  Congress. 

The  Twelfth  Legislature  took,  however,  some 
important  action  concerning  relations  with  the  Indian 
tribes,  and  it  enacted  a  measure  drafted  by  Samuel 
Jones  "for  the  amendment  of  the  law  and  the  better 
advancement  of  justice,"  which  was  of  inestimable 
value  in  reforming  and  improving  the  State's  whole 
system  of  jurisprudence.  On  March  3,  1789,  it 
adjourned  sine  die. 

Now  came  the  first  great  electoral  contest  in  the  State 
of  New  York.  The  people  were  pretty  evenly  divided 
between  Federalists  and  Anti-Federalists,  and  each 
party  had  a  leader  of  transcendent  power.  The  Fed- 
eralist leader  was  Hamilton;  young,  gifted  with  genius 
of  constructive  statesmanship  beyond  any  man  of  his 
time,  enjoying  the  confidence  and  special  favor  of 
Washington,  but  fatally  lacking  in  the  party-leading 
and  men-manipulating  arts  of  the  practical  politician. 
The  Anti-Federalist  leader  was  the  veteran  Clinton, 
with  tremendous  prestige  of  achievement,  with  great 
intellectual  ability,  with  unsurpassed  personal  popu- 
larity, and  with  consummate  mastery  of  every  trick  in 


112  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1789 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  whole  game  of  political  diplomacy.  And  Clinton 
was  a  candidate  for  reelection,  for  his  fifth  consecutive 
term. 

The  election  was  to  be  held  in  April,  1789.  As  early 
as  February  1 1  the  Federalists  held  a  caucus  in  New 
York,  to  select  a  candidate  with  whom  to  oppose  Clin- 
ton. Hamilton  dominated  the  meeting;  with  him  in  it 
were  James  Duane,  William  Duer,  Robert  Troup, 
Richard  Harrison,  and — mirabile  dictu,  and  for  that 
occasion  only — Aaron  Burr.  The  strongest  possible 
candidate  would  doubtless  have  been  John  Jay;  but  he 
was  absorbed  in  national  affairs  and  was  not  to  be 
thought  of.  Next  to  him,  most  Federalists  turned 
toward  Richard  Morris,  the  Chief-Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  while  a  considerable  minority  favored 
Pierre  Van  Cortlandt,  the  Lieutenant-Governor. 
Hamilton,  however,  succeeded  in  persuading  them  to 
nominate  Robert  Yates,  who  was  an  Associate-Justice  of 
the  Supreme  Court.  Now,  Yates  was  an  Anti-Federalist. 
He  had  withdrawn  from  the  Constitutional  convention 
at  Philadelphia  because  of  his  opposition  to  Hamilton's 
plans  for  a  national  Constitution.  He  had  bitterly 
opposed  ratification  of  the  Constitution  by  New  York. 
Nevertheless,  after  its  ratification  he  was  prompt  to  give 
it  full  support,  telling  a  grand  jury  that  they  and  all 
loyal  citizens  must  regard  it  as  a  charter  second  in 
dignity  and  importance  only  to  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  itself.  He  was  not  eminent  for  learning, 
though  his  talents  were  respectable;  but  he  stood  fore- 
.rnost  in  integrity,  impartiality,  and  independence. 


ROBERT  R.  LIVINGSTOX 

Robert  R.  Livingston,  chancellor;  born  in  New  York  City, 
November  27,  1746;  lawyer;  city  recorder,  1773-75;  member 
provincial  convention,  1775;  delegate  to  the  continental  con- 
gress, 1775-77  and  1779-81  ;  one  of  the  committee  of  five  ap- 
pointed to  draw  up  the  Declaration  of  Independence  but 
returned  to  duties  in  the  provincial  assembly  before  it  was 
signed;  secretary  of  foreign  affairs,  1781-83;  delegate  to  state 
consitutional  convention,  1788;  chancellor,  1777-1801  and  ad- 
mini-tered  the  oath  of  office  to  President  Washington,  April 
30,  1789;  defeated  by  John  Jay  for  governor,  1798;  minister 
plenipotentiary  to  France,  1801-4;  assisted  Robert  Fulton  and 
was  his  backer  and  partner  in  construction  of  the  first  steam- 
boats; died  in  Clermont,  N.  Y.,  February  26,  1813. 


ALEXANDER  MACOMB 

Alexander  Macomb,  merchant;  born  in  Belfast,  Ireland, 
July  27,  1748;  emigrated  to  the  United  States  and  became  a 
fur  trader  with  John  Jacob  Aster;  in  1791  bought  from  New 
York  state  3,670,715  acres  of  land  along  the  St.  Lawrence 
river  for  1  shilling  (about  12' A  cents)  an  acre;  died  at 
Georgetown,  D.  C.,  1832. 


1794]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  145 

appears  to  have  been  made.  The  old  Council  accepted 
its  dismissal,  and  the  new  Council  entered  upon  the 
exercise  of  its  duties  unimpeded. 

The  first  important  act  of  the  new  Council  was  the 
appointment  of  Egbert  Benson  to  be  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  over  this  a  controversy  arose  which 
had  far-reaching  results.  Down  to  this  time  the  custom 
had  invariably  been  for  the  Governor,  as  president  of 
the  Council,  to  make  the  nominations,  and  for  the  four 
members  of  the  Council  to  ratify  or  reject  them,  the 
Governor  voting  only  in  case  of  a  tie.  But  on  this 
occasion  Governor  Clinton  flatly  refused  to  nominate 
Mr.  Benson,  doubtless  because  of  nothing  but  personal 
and  political  animosity.  Thereupon  Philip  Schuyler 
took  matters  into  his  own  hand  and  himself  made  the 
nomination.  Against  this  Clinton  vigorously  protested, 
insisting  that  the  Constitution  gave  him  the  sole  right 
and  power  of  nomination ;  Schuyler  on  the  other  hand 
maintaining  that  the  members  of  the  Council  had  equal 
rights  and  powers  with  the  Governor.  The  fact  was 
that  the  Constitution  was  quite  indefinite  on  that  point 
and  there  was  probably  as  good  ground  for  the  one 
contention  as  the  other;  though  it  must  be  conceded  that 
Clinton's  view  was  the  more  logical  and  was  that  which 
the  Constitution  ought  to  have  warranted. 

The  dispute  went,  however,  further  than  this. 
Schuyler,  intent  upon  visiting  upon  Clinton  the  full 
measure  of  his  wrath  for  the  humiliations  which  he  had 
suffered  at  the  Governor's  hand,  declared  that  the 
Council  had  the  right  and  power  to  increase  at  will  the 
number  of  officers  not  limited  by  law,  and  to  replace 


146  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1794 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

with  a  new  appointee  any  officer  at  the  expiration  of 
his  commission.  The  latter  contention  was  undoubtedly 
correct,  provided  that  the  Council  had  concurrent 
power  of  appointment  with  the  Governor.  The  former 
was  also  probably  correct,  technically,  on  the  same 
ground,  though  it  is  obvious  that  its  application  was 
susceptible  of  gross  and  disastrous  abuse.  Clinton 
logically  argued  that  the  Governor  alone,  and  not  the 
Council,  was  charged  by  the  Constitution  with  the 
execution  of  the  laws,  and  that  therefore  he  was  alone 
vested  with  discretion  as  to  the  number  of  officials 
needed  to  assist  him  in  such  execution.  Concerning  the 
second  point,  he  conceded  that  the  Constitution  gave 
to  officials  no  tenure  after  the  expiration  of  their  com- 
missions, but  he  rightly  argued  that  they  should  not  be 
dropped  and  replaced  with  others  at  the  caprice  or 
arbitrary  pleasure  of  the  appointing  power,  but  should 
be  retained  or  removed  discreetly  with  a  view  solely  to 
the  public  good. 

Clinton  was  right.  But  the  fatal  weakness  of  his 
position  was  two-fold.  One  was,  that  he  was  not 
explicitly  sustained  by  the  Constitution,  which  was 
indefinite  on  the  points  involved.  The  other,  which 
practically  counted  for  more,  was  that  he  was,  as  he 
himself  must  have  recognized,  an  usurping  Governor, 
occupying  his  place  through  a  monstrous  perversion  of 
the  forms  of  law  and  a  flagrant  denial  of  the  indispu- 
table intent  of  the  voters  of  the  State.  It  was  a  righteous 
resentment  against  the  iniquitous  rejection  of  the  votes 
which  would  have  elected  Jay  that  moved  the  people 
of  New  York  to  countenance  the  arbitrary  course  which 


1794]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  147 

the  Assembly  under  the  lead  of  Hoffman  and  the 
Council  under  the  lead  of  Schuyler  pursued;  a 
righteous  resentment,  yet  with  evil  consequences,  for  its 
result  was  to  mark  the  remaining  history  of  the  Council 
of  Appointment  with  an  almost  unbroken  succession  of 
political  scandals.  It  was  the  introduction  of  the  spoils 
system  into  New  York  politics. 

The  Governor  in  October  following,  1794,  published 
a  strong  protest  against  the  arbitrary  conduct  of  the 
three  Federalist  members  of  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment, to  which  those  members  made  a  long  and  labored 
but  not  particularly  convincing  reply.  They  attempted 
to  convict  the  Governor  of  misusing  his  appointing 
power  for  personal  and  political  ends.  In  that  they 
failed,  for  as  a  matter  of  fact  not  more  than  two  or  three 
times  in  all  his  long  administration  had  Clinton  made 
appointments  which  were  reasonably  open  to  such 
criticism. 

At  the  session  of  1794  the  Legislature  enacted  three 
measures  arising  from  the  disputed  votes  at  the  election 
of  1792.  One  provided  that  Sheriffs  should  hold  office 
until  their  successors  were  appointed  and  qualified. 
Another  required  town  inspectors  of  elections  to  canvass 
the  votes  and  return  the  result  thereof  to  the  State  can- 
vassers. The  third — by  the  Assembly — dismissed  as 
"frivolous  and  vexatious"  the  movement  for  the 
impeachment  of  William  Cooper,  Judge  of  Otsego 
county.  The  Legislature  then  adjourned  without  day, 
on  March  27. 

The  elections  in  April,  1794,  resulted  generally  in 
favor  of  the  Federalists.  The  new  Legislature  met  at 


148  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1795 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Poughkeepsie  on  January  6,  1795,  and  the  Assembly 
elected  General  William  North,  of  Duanesburg,  a  Fed- 
eralist, Speaker.  Governor  Clinton  for  the  first  time 
was  absent  from  the  opening.  He  was  in  fact  ill,  at 
Greenwich,  with  inflammatory  rheumatism,  and  was 
quite  unable  to  leave  his  room.  He  accordingly  sent  a 
written  message  in  lieu  of  the  usual  opening  address. 
In  this  excellent  document  he  referred  to  the  European 
war  and  the  consequent  desirability  of  improving  the 
defenses  of  New  York  harbor.  He  recurred  to  the  need 
of  revising  the  criminal  laws,  urging  the  substitution  of 
imprisonment  at  hard  labor  in  many  cases  for  the  death 
penalty.  Taking  up  again  his  favorite  topic  of  educa- 
tion, he  reminded  the  Legislature  that  while  it  had 
liberally  provided  for  the  aid  of  higher  and  secondary 
institutions  of  learning,  it  had  as  yet  done  nothing  for 
primary  schools,  and  he  recommended  that  some  action 
for  their  benefit  be  immediately  taken.  The  Legis- 
lature made  haste  to  comply  with  this  suggestion,  and 
appropriated  $50,000  a  year,  for  five  years,  for  distri- 
bution among  the  counties  for  that  purpose. 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  January  14  to 
reassemble  at  New  York  on  January  20,  and  there 
continued  in  session  until  April  9,  when  it  adjourned 
without  day.  Not  the  least  important  of  its  business 
was  the  election  of  a  United  States  Senator  to  succeed 
Rufus  King,  whose  term  expired  on  March  4.  The 
election  took  place  on  January  27,  and  Mr.  King  was 
reelected  by  a  narrow  majority  of  two  in  the  Senate  and 
five  in  the  Assembly,  although  the  Federalists  had 
larger  majorities  than  those  in  the  houses.  A  new 


179S]  CLINTON  AND  JAY  149 

Council  of  Appointment  was  also  elected  by  the 
Assembly,  consisting  of  Jacobus  Van  Schoonoven, 
Richard  Hatfield,  and  William  Powers,  Federalists, 
and  Joseph  Hasbrouck,  Anti-Federalist — the  last- 
named  being  unanimously  elected  and  the  others  by  a 
vote  of  36  to  29. 

A  Governor  was  to  be  chosen  at  the  April  election  in 
1795,  and  there  can  be  no  question  that  Clinton  would 
greatly  have  liked  to  be  returned  for  another  term.  But 
he  realized  long  in  advance  that  it  was  not  to  be.  He 
had  been  Governor  continuously  for  eighteen  years. 
His  private  affairs  sorely  needed  his  attention.  His 
health  was  seriously  impaired,  though  he  was  still  in 
the  prime  of  life  at  fifty-six.  The  circumstances  of  the 
last  election,  when  he  had  been  arbitrarily  "counted  in" 
over  Jay,  bitterly  rankled  in  the  public  mind  and  caused 
strong  opposition  to  him  to  prevail  even  among  former 
friends  and  supporters.  Elections  since  then  had  gone 
heavily  against  his  party.  In  these  circumstances, 
therefore,  it  was  not  surprising  that  on  January  22  he 
issued  an  address  to  the  freeholders  of  the  State 
announcing  that  he  would  not  be  a  candidate  for 
reelection.  In  that  announcement  he  was  doubtless 
sincere,  as  he  was  also  in  his  expression  of  thanks  to  the 
people  for  their  loyal  support  of  him  and  their  long- 
continued  confidence  in  him;  but  his  statement  that  he 
would  "retire  with  pleasure"  must  be  taken  with  a 
large  grain  of  salt.  Pierre  Van  Cortlandt  at  the  same 
time  announced  that,  on  account  of  his  advanced  age, 
he  would  not  be  a  candidate  for  reelection  as  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
JOHN  JAY 

THE  temporary  retirement  of  George  Clinton 
from  the  political  field  was  generally  recognized 
as  a  confession  of  expected  defeat  in  the  impend- 
ing election  for  the  party  of  which  he  was  the  leader, 
and  there  was  therefore  no  eagerness  on  the  part  of  any 
of  his  lieutenants  to  be  the  candidate.  There  was  some 
talk  of  Burr,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  would 
have  accepted  the  nomination  if  it  had  been  offered  to 
him.  But  the  majority  of  the  party  leaders  distrusted 
him  and  would  not  have  him.  Instead,  they  offered  the 
nomination  to  Chief-Justice  Yates,  who  six  years  before 
had  been  the  candidate  opposing  Clinton.  Probably  it 
was  the  best  possible  choice  for  a  hopeless  case,  for 
Yates  was  an  entirely  worthy  candidate;  though  his 
willingness  to  accept  the  nomination,  now  from  one 
party  and  now  from  the  other,  provoked  much  unfavor- 
able comment.  It  was  observed  that  in  1789  he  received 
the  votes  of  nearly  half  the  electors  of  the  State,  and 
that  in  1795  he  received  the  votes  of  nearly  all  those 
who  had  opposed  him  before,  who  were  the  other  half 
of  the  State.  Thus  in  the  course  of  six  years  perhaps 
nine-tenths  of  the  voters  of  the  State  cast  their  ballots 
for  him,  and  yet  he  was  not  elected.  William  Floyd 
was  his  companion  on  the  ticket  in  1795,  as  candidate 
for  Lieutenant-Governor. 

150 


1795]  JOHN  JAY  151 

There  was  less  hesitation  over  the  candidate  on  the 
Federalist  side.  A  few  indeed  suggested  Burr,  but  they 
were  quickly  cried  down.  Most  would  have  been  glad 
to  have  Hamilton,  but  he  peremptorily  and  wisely 
refused  to  be  considered.  Instead,  he  practically  dic- 
tated the  nomination  of  John  Jay,  with  Stephen  Van 
Rensselaer,  the  great  patroon,  for  Lieutenant-Governor. 
To  this  choice  there  was  little  demur.  Jay  was 
immensely  popular,  and  his  unrivalled  fitness  for  the 
place  was  generally  recognized.  Moreover,  it  was  felt 
that  he  had  been  most  unjustly  "counted  out"  at  the 
preceding  election,  and  there  was  a  laudable  desire  to 
atone  for  that  wrong.  On  the  other  hand,  there  were 
many  who  looked  with  grave  apprehension  upon  the 
nomination  and  the  possible  result.  Jay  had  been  sent 
by  the  President  the  year  before  to  negotiate  a  treaty 
with  Great  Britain,  in  circumstances  which  made  it 
practically  certain  that  the  result  of  his  work  would 
be  unpopular.  The  treaty  had  been  signed  on  Novem- 
ber 19,  and  would  soon  be  in  the  hands  of  the  Senate. 
Its  provisions  had  not  yet  been  disclosed,  but  there  was 
a  widespread  impression  that  when  the  treaty  was 
ratified  and  published,  there  would  be  a  storm  of  pop- 
ular protest  and  resentment  against  it,  if  indeed  it  ever 
did  receive  ratification.  Hamilton,  of  course,  knew  its 
contents,  and  probably  realized  how  unpopular  they 
would  be  and  how  bitter  a  storm  of  wrath  would  break 
upon  Jay  when  the  character  of  his  work  was  made 
known.  But  he  doubtless  counted  upon  the  day  of 
wrath  being  deferred  until  after  Jay  was  safely  elected 
Governor.  Possibly  he  also  counted  upon  being  able 


152  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1795 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

to  assure  such  delay,  as  indeed  he  was,  the  treaty  not 
being  laid  before  the  Senate  until  long  after  the  election. 
At  any  rate,  he  insisted  upon  Jay's  nomination  while 
Jay  was  still  in  England  and  unaware  of  the  candidacy 
which  was  thus  being  forced  upon  him. 

Because  of  Jay's  absence  from  the  country,  Yates's 
place  upon  the  bench,  and  Clinton's  retirement,  the 
campaign  was  notably  quiet  and  listless.  It  resulted,  as 
had  been  confidently  expected,  in  a  notable  victory  for 
Jay,  his  majority  being  1,589,  more  than  three  times  as 
large  as  Clinton's  over  Yates  six  years  before,  and  about 
fifteen  times  as  large  as  that  by  which  Clinton  had  been 
"counted  in"  over  Jay  three  years  before.  All  the  five 
State  Senators  elected  were  Federalists,  and  that  party 
secured  a  strong  majority  in  each  house  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. The  result  was  not  officially  announced  by  the 
State  board  of  canvassers  until  May  26.  Two  days  later 
Jay  arrived  at  New  York  from  England.  He  was 
welcomed  by  a  great  outpouring  of  the  populace,  with 
the  enthusiastic  manifestations  of  affection,  confidence, 
and  honor  which  that  illustrious  man  richly  deserved. 
Yet,  as  we  shall  see,  this  was  only  the  first  part  of  one  of 
the  most  striking  and  most  discreditable  exhibitions  of 
the  fickleness  of  popular  favor  that  history  records. 

Jay  was  formally  installed  as  Governor  on  July  1, 
The  next  day  the  text  of  the  treaty  was  published  in  a 
Philadelphia  newspaper,  and  a  day  later  it  was  gen- 
erally known  in  New  York.  Then  broke  such  a  storm 
of  hatred  and  obloquy  as  perhaps  never  had  been  known 
before  or  has  been  known  since.  Those  who  a  little 
while  before  had  been  applauding  Jay  to  the  echo,  now 


1795]  JOHN  JAY  153 

raved  like  maniacs  against  him.  He  was  hanged  and 
burned  in  effigy.  In  big  white  letters  on  Broadway, 
New  York,  appeared  the  legend:  "Damn  John  Jay! 
Damn  everyone  that  won't  damn  John  Jay!!  Damn 
everyone  that  won't  put  lights  in  his  windows  and  sit 
up  all  night  damning  John  Jay!!!"  And  it  seemed  as 
though  the  majority  of  New  Yorkers  escaped  the  curse 
by  sitting  up  nights  for  that  imprecatory  purpose.  A 
monster  mass-meeting  was  summoned  to  give  expression 
to  public  sentiment  on  the  subject.  To  his  great  credit 
Hamilton  challenged  violence  and  death  by  attending  it 
and  attempting  to  speak  in  Jay's  behalf.  But  the  mob 
would  not  hear  him.  He  was  first  howled  down,  then 
pelted  almost  to  insensibility  with  brickbats  and  stones, 
and  his  life  was  saved  only  through  his  being  carried 
away  in  the  arms  of  his  friends.  Then  the  mob  repaired 
to  Jay's  house,  carrying  the  American  and  French 
flags,  and  before  his  door  burned  a  copy  of  the  treaty. 

Through  all  this  Jay  remained  calm,  dignified, 
imperturbable,  integer  vitae,  scelerisque  purus;  confi- 
dent that  time  would  vindicate  not  only  the  purity  and 
patriotism  but  also  the  prudence  and  wisdom  of  his 
course.  That  treaty  belongs  to  the  history  of  the  nation 
rather  than  to  that  of  the  State.  But  it  is  fitting  here  to 
record  the  sober  judgment  of  the  years  that  followed, 
that  while  the  treaty  had  some  regrettable  faults,  which 
Jay  himself  recognized,  it  was  the  best  that  it  was  then 
possible  to  make,  it  was  on  the  whole  immensely  bene- 
ficial, and  the  negotiation  of  it  was  by  no  means  the 
least,  though  it  was  the  last,  of  John  Jay's  public  ser- 
vices to  the  nation.  Nor  is  it  the  least  of  the  glories  of 


154  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1795 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Empire  State  that  at  this  early  period  it  was  one  of 
her  native  sons  who  thus  marked  a  new  era  in  interna- 
tional relationships.  For  we  must  remember  that  it  was 
this  treaty  which  first  established  the  principle  of  the 
extradition  of  criminals  and  the  principle  that  private 
debts  or  contracts  between  individuals  should  not  be 
annulled  by  war. 

The  causes  of  this  furious  outbreak  of  brute  wrath 
against  Jay  were  several.  One  was  the  old  animosity 
of  Anti-Federalist  against  Federalist,  of  State  rights 
against  national  sovereignty;  an  honest  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  constitutional  relation  between  the 
States  and  the  nation.  Another  was  a  legitimate 
objection  to  some  features  of  the  treaty  and  a  lack  of 
appreciation  of  its  good  qualities.  A  third  was  the 
unfounded  fear  that  he  would  be  a  tool  in  Hamilton's 
hands  for  building  up  a  powerful  Federalist  "machine" 
through  official  patronage.  Another  was  resentment  at 
his  victory  over  Clinton,  who  was  idolized  by  a  multi- 
tude of  followers.  Another  was  the  pro-Gallican  and 
anti-Anglican  mania  which  was  unhappily  prevalent  at 
that  time.  Still  another,  and  not  the  least  potent  of  all, 
was  a  certain  looking  toward  the  coming  Presidential 
election  of  the  next  year.  Washington  was  certain  to 
retire,  and  either  Jay  or  Adams  would  be  the  Federalist 
candidate  to  succeed  him.  The  opposition  wanted 
Jefferson,  and  sought  to  discredit  Jay  as  perhaps  his 
most  formidable  opponent.  Of  course,  while  some  of 
these  motives  were  respectable  and  some  not,  they  none 
of  them,  nor  all  united,  could  warrant  the  excesses  of 
passion  which  were  displayed. 


1796]  JOHN  JAY  155 

At  that  period,  and  in  fact  ever  since  the  latter  part 
of  Washington's  first  administration,  the  old  Anti- 
Federalists  had  become  consolidated  into  a  national 
party  organization  called  the  Democratic-Republican 
party.  Its  followers  were  popularly  known  as  "the 
Democracy" — but  originally  and  for  some  time  they 
preferred  to  call  themselves  "Republicans"  on  account 
of  their  strong  sympathy  with  republican  France.  In 
the  respects  of  general  composition,  principles,  and 
continuity  this  new  organization  is  historically  asso- 
ciated with  the  Democratic  party  of  later  times.  In  our 
narrative  it  will  be  referred  to  as  the  Democracy  or 
Democratic  opposition  during  the  period  of  its  national 
minority  in  opposition  to  the  Federalists,  and  as  the 
Democratic  party  subsequently  to  that  period. 

The  Nineteenth  Legislature  met  in  New  York  on 
January  5,  1796,  a  quorum  being  secured  the  next  day 
and,  as  already  stated,  there  being  in  each  house  a  strong 
Federalist  majority  favorable  to  Jay.  The  opening 
address  was  comprehensive  in  scope  and  admirable  in 
tone.  Jay  declared  it  to  be  his  purpose  to  regard  his 
fellow-citizens  with  equal  eye;  to  cherish  and  advance 
merit,  wherever  found;  to  consider  the  national  and 
State  Constitutions  and  governments  as  being  equally 
established  by  the  will  of  the  people;  to  respect  and 
support  the  constituted  authorities  under  each  of  them; 
and  in  general  to  exercise  the  powers  vested  in  him  with 
energy,  impartiality,  and  prudence,  an  obligation  of 
which  he  perceived  and  acknowledged  the  full  force. 


156  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1796 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  address  was  rich  in  constructive  statesmanship,  and 
contained  numerous  suggestions  which  led  to  important 
improvements  in  the  State  government. 

Thus  he  called  attention  to  the  dispute  which  had 
been  raging  over  the  status  of  the  Governor  in  the 
Council  of  Appointment,  and  the  urgent  desirability  of 
settling  authoritatively  whether  the  Governor,  as  presi- 
dent of  that  Council,  had  the  sole  initiative  in  making 
appointments.  With  a  fine  sense  of  propriety  he 
refrained  from  making  any  expression  of  his  personal 
opinion  on  the  matter,  but  commended  it  to  the  careful 
consideration  of  the  Assembly  and  requested  a  declara- 
tory resolution  concerning  it.  The  Assembly,  after 
much  thought  and  discussion,  decided  that  it  would  be 
inexpedient  for  it  thus  apparently  to  attempt  to  construe 
the  Constitution.  Perhaps  it  felt  all  the  more  reluctance 
to  do  so  since  Jay  himself  had  been  the  author  of  that 
instrument.  But  a  movement  was  then  started  which 
led  directly  to  the  Constitutional  convention  of  1801 
and  the  adoption  thereby  of  an  amendment  more  satis- 
factorily defining  the  powers  of  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment. 

Attention  was  called  by  Jay  to  the  inadequacy  of  the 
salaries  then  paid  to  the  Chancellor  and  the  Justices  of 
the  Supreme  Court,  which  permitted  them  to  make  no 
provision  for  their  years  of  retirement  after  the  consti- 
tutional limit  of  age  had  been  reached,  and  he  urged 
that  some  measure  of  relief  be  enacted.  This  was 
interpreted  by  the  Assembly  as  a  suggestion  of  judicial 
retiring  pensions,  and  a  committee  of  that  house 
reported  against  such  a  system  but  in  favor  of  whatever 


1796]  JOHN  JAY  157 

increase  of  salary  might  be  necessary  to  enable  the 
Justices  to  make  provision  for  themselves.  This  report 
was  discussed  at  length  and  then  laid  aside  without 
action,  but  in  the  ensuing  Appropriation  bill  provision 
was  made  for  a  material  increase  of  judicial  salaries. 

Another  recommendation  was  that  assistance  be  given 
to  the  Attorney-General,  who  because  of  the  growth  of 
the  State  was  sorely  overworked  and  was  in  fact  unable 
properly  to  attend  to  the  business  of  his  office.  In 
response  the  Legislature  on  February  12  enacted  a  law 
dividing  the  State  into  eight  districts  and  creating  an 
Assistant-Attorney-General  for  each  of  seven  of  them, 
the  Attorney-General  himself  to  serve  in  the  eighth, 
which  consisted  of  the  city  and  county  of  New  York. 
Later  in  the  history  of  the  State  the  system  was  changed 
so  as  to  provide  a  District  Attorney  for  each  county. 

Jay  strongly  renewed  Clinton's  recommendation  of  a 
revision  of  the  criminal  law  so  as  to  restrict  the  imposi- 
tion of  the  death  penalty  and  to  make  better  provision 
for  the  care  of  prisoners.  In  consequence  the  Legis- 
lature on  March  26  provided  for  the  establishment  of 
State  prisons  and  abolished  the  death  penalty  save  for 
treason,  murder,  and  the  sacrilege  involved  in  robbing 
churches.  It  also  abolished  the  practice  of  flogging  as 
a  punishment.  Before  that  time  men  could  be  put  to 
death  for  petty  larceny,  while  not  long  before,  until  an 
enactment  in  1778,  it  had  been  permissible  to  apply 
torture  to  compel  a  prisoner  to  plead  to  his  indictment! 

Having  courageously  remained  at  his  post  of  duty 
during  the  yellow  fever  epidemic  of  1795,  Jay  now 
urged  action,  which  was  promptly  taken,  for  the  better 


158  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1796 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

protection  of  the  State  against  pestilences.  His  recom- 
mendation for  further  promotion  of  canal  navigation 
was  also  productive  of  prompt  and  favorable  results. 

At  this  session  of  the  Legislature  there  was  received 
from  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  a  draft  of  four  pro- 
posed amendments  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  with  the  hope  that  New  York  would  join  in 
supporting  them.  These  amendments  provided  for 
ratification  by  the  House  of  Representatives  of  treaties 
affecting  the  powers  of  Congress  or  calling  for  Con- 
gressional action  to  fulfill  their  terms;  for  the  provision 
of  another  tribunal  than  the  Senate  to  try  impeach- 
ments; for  the  reduction  of  the  terms  of  office  of 
Senators  to  three  years,  one-third  to  retire  every  year; 
and  for  making  United  States  Judges  ineligible  to  other 
offices.  After  much  debate  the  Legislature  voted  that 
it  was  inexpedient  to  concur  in  these  proposals. 

Jay  was  an  ardent  advocate  of  the  abolition  of 
slavery,  and  greatly  desired  to  urge  in  his  address  the 
enactment  of  a  measure  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves. 
After  much  consideration,  however,  and  with  much 
reluctance,  he  decided  not  to  do  so,  for  fear  that  the 
personal  animosity  which  had  arisen  against  him  and 
which  had  not  yet  subsided  would  be  reflected  against 
the  cause  that  he  had  at  heart.  He  knew  that  some  of 
the  Democratic  opposition  were  in  favor  of  emancipa- 
tion, but  feared,  probably  with  good  cause,  that  they 
would  not  vote  for  it  if  he  urged  it.  One  of  his  friends 
in  the  Legislature,  however,  presumably  through  a 
private  understanding  with  him,  introduced  a  bill  pro- 
viding for  gradual  abolition  of  slavery.  It  was  debated 


1796]  JOHN  JAY  159 

at  much  length,  and  finally  was  narrowly  beaten 
through  the  device  of  adopting  a  resolution  to  the  effect 
that  it  would  be  unjust  to  deprive  any  citizen  of  his 
property  without  reasonable  compensation  to  be  paid  to 
him  by  the  State.  This  resolution  met  with  a  tie  vote  in 
the  Assembly,  and  was  carried  by  the  casting  vote  of  the 
chairman  of  the  committee  of  the  whole.  Thereupon 
the  subject  was  dropped  for  the  remainder  of  the  ses- 
sion. 

The  census  returns  reported  to  the  Legislature  in 
January,  1796,  showed  36,338  freeholders,  and  a  total 
of  60,017  voters  in  the  State.  The  increase  of  free- 
holders, who  were  electors  for  Senators,  had  been  greatly 
promoted  by  the  migration  of  substantial  settlers  from 
New  England  into  the  western  part  of  New  York.  Now 
the  Constitution  fixed  the  number  of  Senators  at  24,  but 
provided  for  an  increase  of  that  number  commen- 
surately  with  the  increase  in  the  number  of  electors, 
until  the  total  should  reach  one  hundred  Senators. 
Under  that  provision  the  census  of  1796  called  for  the 
election  of  twenty  additional  Senators,  or  forty-four  in 
all,  of  whom  seventeen  should  be  chosen  from  the 
Western  district,  which  comprised  Albany  and  all 
counties  to  the  west  of  it.  This  increase  of  Senators  was 
thereupon  provided  for,  but  in  order  to  equalize  the 
Senatorial  representation  from  the  districts,  Albany  and 
Saratoga  counties  were  transferred  from  the  Western 
to  the  Eastern  district. 

After  an  exceptionally  busy  and  useful  session  the 
Legislature  adjourned  sine  die  on  April  11,  ordering, 


160  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1796 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

however,  a  meeting  of  its  successor  on  November  1, 
1796,  for  the  choice  of  Presidential  Electors. 

The  election  in  April,  1796,  resulted  most  favorably 
to  the  Federalists.  The  State  was  ashamed  of  its  brutal 
outburst  against  Jay  of  the  year  before,  and  the  admi- 
rable character  of  his  administration  caused  a  strong 
reaction  of  sentiment  in  his  favor.  This  was  promoted, 
too,  by  disgust  at  the  conduct  of  the  French  government, 
and  admiration  of  the  attitude  of  Washington  toward  it. 
The  Federalists  were  also  greatly  strengthened  by  the 
immigration  from  New  England  already  mentioned, 
as  a  result  of  which  the  State  Senate  became  almost 
unanimously  Federalist. 

The  Twentieth  Legislature  met,  according  to  the  pre- 
scription of  its  predecessor,  at  New  York  on  November 
1,  1796,  and  Gulian  Verplanck,  of  that  city,  was  chosen 
Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  Jay's  opening  speech  was 
chiefly  devoted  to  a  most  eloquent  and  sympathetic  com- 
mentary upon  Washington's  Farewell  Address,  which 
was  then  communicated  to  the  Legislature  and  was 
recorded  in  full  in  the  journal  of  each  house.  He 
announced  that  the  city  of  New  York  had  generously 
given  Bedlow's  Island  to  the  State  for  quarantine  pur- 
poses, in  consequence  of  which  the  Legislature  made 
further  enactments  for  the  protection  of  health.  He 
called  attention  to  the  need  of  better  management  of  the 
fiscal  accounts  of  the  State,  and  in  response  the  Legis- 
lature on  February  17,  1797,  created  the  office  of  State 
Comptroller.  His  recommendation  of  further  highway 
improvements  led  to  the  enactment  of  a  general  High- 
way law  on  March  21,  1797.  He  announced  that  Rufus 


RUFUS  KIXG 

Rufus  King,  United  States  senator;  born  at  Scarboro,  Mass., 
March  24,  1755;  lawyer;  served  in  revolutionary  war;  member 
of  Massachusetts  legislature,  1782;  delegate  from  Mass- 
achusetts to  continental  congress,  1784-87;  United  States 
senator  from  July  10,  1789  to  May  18,  1796  when  he  resigned; 
minister  to  Great  Britain,  1796-1803;  defeated  candidate  for 
vice-president,  1804;  again  United  States  senator  1813-25;  de- 
feated for  governor  1815  and  for  United  States  president  in 
1816;  again  minister  to  Great  Britain,  1825-26;  died  in 
Jamacia,  L.  I.,  April  29,  1827. 


1796]  JOHN  JAY  161 

King,  United  States  Senator,  had  accepted  appointment 
as  Minister  to  England,  and  that  a  successor  should 
therefore  be  chosen  for  his  vacated  seat;  whereupon  the 
Legislature  elected  John  Lawrence,  the  local  United 
States  District  Judge,  a  Federalist  and  a  man  of  fine 
ability,  a  close  friend  of  Washington,  and  Judge  Advo- 
cate of  the  court  that  tried  John  Andre. 

The  choice  of  Presidential  Electors  was  especially 
important  because  of  the  retirement  of  Washington  and 
the  vigorous  fight  which  Jefferson  was  making  to  suc- 
ceed him.  Jay,  who  a  year  before  had  been  regarded 
as  a  leading  candidate  of  the  Federalists,  now  elim- 
inated himself  and  gave  his  influence  in  favor  of  John 
Adams,  who  was  undoubtedly  the  choice  of  most  of  the 
Federalists  in  the  eastern  and  middle  States.  Hamil- 
ton himself  would  have  preferred  Thomas  Pinckney, 
of  South  Carolina,  for  President,  with  Adams  continued 
in  office  as  Vice-President,  and  he  urged  his  friends  to 
give  those  candidates  an  equal  number  of  votes,  pre- 
sumably expecting — as  was  indeed  the  case — that 
Adams  would  be  scratched  by  some  southern  Electors, 
and  that  thus  Pinckney  would  become  President  and 
Adams  Vice-President.  But  Pinckney  was  scratched 
by  still  more  New  England  Electors,  with  the  result  that 
Adams  headed  the  poll  as  President  while  Pinckney 
fell  behind  Jefferson,  and  the  latter  was  chosen  Vice- 
President.  The  New  York  Legislature  chose,  of  course, 
twelve  Federalists  as  Electors,  and  they  voted  solidly 
for  Adams  and  Pinckney — or  for  Pinckney  and  Adams. 
The  New  York  Anti-Federalists  would  have  voted,  had 
they  been  in  power,  for  Jefferson  for  President  and  for 


162  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1797 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

George  Clinton  for  Vice-President.  Clinton  in  fact 
received  the  four  votes  of  Georgia,  while  Jay  received 
four  from  Connecticut,  and  Aaron  Burr  received  13 
from  Pennsylvania,  6  from  North  Carolina,  4  from 
Kentucky,  3  each  from  Maryland  and  Tennessee,  and 
one  from  Virginia,  a  total  of  30,  which  placed  him  next 
to  Jefferson  among  the  Democratic  opposition  candi- 
dates. 

The  Legislature  took  a  recess  on  November  11,  and 
reassembled  at  Albany  on  January  3.  There  the 
Assembly  chose  a  new  Council  of  Appointment,  all  four 
members  of  which  were  Federalists.  A  law  was  enacted 
on  March  1 1  making  Albany  the  permanent  capital  of 
the  State;  providing  for  a  building  there  for  the  use  of 
the  Secretary  of  State  and  the  Clerk  of  the  Supreme 
Court;  requiring  the  State  Treasurer  and  State  Comp- 
troller to  maintain  their  offices  there;  and  requiring  the 
Legislature  to  meet  there  unless  specially  adjourned  to 
some  other  place  or  specially  convened  elsewhere  by  the 
Governor. 

Aaron  Burr's  term  as  United  States  Senator  expired 
in  1797,  and  it  was  incumbent  upon  this  Legislature  to 
elect  his  successor.  Of  course  there  was  no  thought  of 
reelecting  Burr  in  so  strongly  Federalist  a  Legislature. 
Instead  the  choice  fell  without  hesitation  upon  Philip 
Schuyler,  who  had  formerly  been  defeated  by  the  smart 
trickery  of  Burr. 

Some  gains  were  made  by  the  Democracy  in  the 
Congressional  elections  of  December,  1796,  when  they 
elected  four  Representatives — in  New  York,  West- 
chester,  Suffolk,  and  Ulster  counties, — and  these  were 


1797-8]  JOHN  JAY  163 

followed  by  similar  results  in  the  spring  elections  of 
1797.  In  New  York  City  all  their  legislative  candi- 
dates were  elected  by  heavy  majorities,  among  them 
being  Aaron  Burr,  who  thus  changed  a  national  for  a 
State  Senatorship,  and  DeWitt  Clinton,  son  of  James 
and  nephew  of  George  Clinton,  who  thus  for  the  first 
time  entered  public  office.  DeWitt  Clinton  was  a 
staunch  member  of  the  party  of  which  his  uncle  was — 
or  had  been — the  leader,  though  he  accepted  and 
supported  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  much 
more  cordially  than  most  other  members  of  it,  and 
vigorously  resented  the  offensive  conduct  of  the  French 
government;  so  that  many  Federalists,  including  Ham- 
ilton himself,  expected  to  see  him  some  day  affiliated 
with  their  party. 

This  twenty-first  Legislature  met  at  Albany  on  Jan- 
uary 2,  1798,  and  Derrick  Ten  Eyck  was  chosen 
Speaker  of  the  Assembly  by  a  vote  of  59  to  42,  which 
probably  pretty  exactly  represented  the  respective  party 
strengths.  The  Governor  confined  his  address  to  the 
State  interests  that  seemed  to  require  immediate 
attention  of  the  Legislature,  and  scrupulously  avoided 
anything  that  might  have  seemed  to  savor  of  party 
politics.  The  session  was,  however,  marked  with  a 
number  of  exceptionally  interesting  transactions.  The 
question  was  raised  whether  it  was  permissible  for  a 
member  of  the  Legislature  to  hold  at  the  same  time 
another  State  office,  Samuel  Jones,  a  Senator,  having 
been  made  Comptroller.  A  resolution  was  introduced 
into  the  Senate  declaring  that  by  acceptance  of  the  latter 
office  he  had  vacated  his  seat  in  the  Senate,  but  after 


164  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1798 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

much  discussion  it  was  rejected  by  a  large  majority, 
probably  more  because  of  unwillingness  to  dismiss  from 
the  Senate  so  eminent  and  useful  a  member  as  Mr. 
Jones  than  through  belief  in  the  propriety  of  dual  office- 
holding. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  session  a  communication  was 
received  from  Philip  Schuyler,  asking  permission  to 
resign  his  seat  in  the  United  States  Senate,  an  inter- 
esting reminder  of  the  punctilious  sense  of  duty  and  of 
courtesy  which  at  that  time  widely — though  not  uni- 
versally— prevailed.  Schuyler  was  at  this  time  only 
sixty-five  years  old,  but  he  had  from  early  youth  led  a 
life  of  extraordinary  exertion  and  achievement.  He  had 
been  a  highly  efficient  commander  in  two  great  wars ;  he 
had  been  a  legislator  for  many  years;  he  had  been  a 
pioneer  in  public  works  of  unsurpassed  difficulty  and 
importance;  he  had  been  made  the  victim  of  monstrous 
public  injustice  and  ingratitude;  and  his  health  was 
seriously  impaired  by  his  arduous  and  little-requited 
labors  for  the  public  good.  Yet  he  could  not  retire 
from  the  cares  and  duties  of  office  without  asking  and 
securing  the  permission  of  the  authority  that  had 
appointed  him  to  it. 

The  Legislature  regretfully  accorded  Schuyler  the 
privilege  of  resigning,  and  elected  in  his  place  John 
Sloss  Hobart,  who  was  at  that  time  an  Associate-Justice 
of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State;  a  man  of  fine 
scholarship,  keen  wit,  high  integrity,  and  patriotism, 
who  accepted  the  appointment  in  a  manner  as  excep- 
tional as  his  predecessor's  relinquishment  of  it.  He 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  Legislature  setting  forth  that  he 


1798]  JOHN  JAY  165 

had  not  been  "bred  to  the  profession  of  the  law,"  yet 
had  been  made  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  at  its 
organization  and  had  held  the  place  for  twenty  years, 
that  his  salary  had  been  insufficient  for  the  wants  of  his 
family,  in  consequence  of  which  he  had  endeavored  to 
eke  out  a  competence  by  farming,  but  was  unable  to  pay 
for  the  farm  which  he  had  purchased;  and  that  he  felt 
the  Legislature  of  his  own  State  "would  not  suffer  an 
old  servant  to  drink  of  the  bitter  cup  of  poverty  and 
distress  in  the  evening  of  his  life."  There  was,  unhap- 
pily, only  too  much  cause  for  this  piteous  complaint, 
nor  was  Hobart  the  only  faithful  servant  of  the  State 
who  was  denied  adequate  remuneration;  and  it  is  a 
melancholy  fact  to  record  that  even  this  letter,  and  the 
strong  appeal  of  the  Governor  hitherto  mentioned, 
failed  to  move  the  Legislature  to  suitable  action.  There 
had  been,  indeed,  provision  made  by  the  Nineteenth 
Legislature  for  the  increase  of  judicial  salaries,  but  it 
does  not  appear  to  have  become  sufficiently  effective  to 
save  men  like  Hobart  from  real  distress.  After  a  man 
had  served  for  many  years  on  a  salary  insufficient  to 
support  his  family  in  even  the  most  modest  style,  a  year 
or  two  of  increase  to  a  sum  just  sufficient  for  such  sup- 
port could  neither  discharge  the  deficits  of  the  past  nor 
provide  for  the  impending  period  of  retirement  when 
even  that  poor  stipend  would  cease. 

Hobart  was  intellectually  well  fitted  to  fill  a  place  in 
the  Senate,  perhaps  better  than  that  upon  the  bench. 
But  three  months  after  his  appointment  he  resigned, 
driven  to  that  course  by  pecuniary  need.  As  his  resig- 
nation was  received  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Legis- 


166  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1798 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

lature,  Jay  made  an  interim  appointment,  selecting  as 
Hobart's  successor  General  William  North  of  Duanes- 
burg,  a  gallant  soldier  who  had  served  with  distinction 
throughout  the  war  from  Quebec  to  Yorktown  and  had 
been  the  closest  friend  and  aid  of  Steuben.  North 
served  for  ten  months,  until  the  Legislature  elected 
James  Watson  to  his  place — another  competent  if  not 
brilliant  Revolutionary  officer  and,  like  North,  a  stal- 
wart Federalist.  To  anticipate  the  record  it  may  be 
added  here  that  Watson  in  turn  resigned  the  Senator- 
ship  and  was  succeeded  by  the  distinguished  Gouver- 
neur  Morris. 

When  Hobart  left  the  bench  for  the  Senate,  Chief- 
Justice  Yates  also  retired  because  of  expiration  of  his 
term.  Like  Hobart,  he  was  doomed  to  poverty  and 
died  heavily  burdened  with  debts,  which  the  State  per- 
mitted his  family  laboriously  to  discharge.  These  two 
vacancies  led  to  a  reorganization  of  the  bench  which 
marked  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  the  court.  John 
Lansing,  Jr.,  a  man  of  excellent  ability  and  long  experi- 
ence, was  made  Chief-Justice.  To  the  Associate-Justice- 
ship Jay  appointed  a  young  man  who  had  already  made 
a  great  mark  in  the  legal  and  also  the  political  world, 
and  who  was  destined  soon  to  rank  among  the  foremost 
jurists  of  the  world  in  any  land  or  age.  This  was  James 
Kent,  of  whom  nothing  more  need  be  said  than  the 
mention  of  his  illustrious  name.  In  August,  1798,  John 
Codine  was  appointed  as  a  fourth  Associate-Justice;  he 
died  a  few  weeks  later  and  was  succeeded  in  December 
by  Jacob  Radcliff,  one  of  the  foremost  chancery  lawyers 
of  his  time. 


1798]  JOHN  JAY  167 

During  this  session  of  the  Legislature  Robert 
McClellan  was  appointed  State  Treasurer;  afterward 
he  became  a  defaulter.  The  office  of  Secretary  of 
State  became  vacant  through  the  death  of  the 
incumbent,  Mr.  Scott,  and  over  the  filling  of  the  place 
there  arose  a  strenuous  contest  which  was  notable  for 
the  fact  that  it  was  one  of  the  very  rare  occasions  when 
Jay  was  in  the  wrong.  Joseph  White,  a  member  of  the 
Council  of  Appointment,  urged  the  selection  of  Major 
Daniel  Hale,  of  Albany,  and  prevailed  upon  his  col- 
leagues to  support  him.  But  Jay  was  for  some 
unexplained  reason  strongly  opposed  to  him  and  for 
a  time  refused  to  nominate  him.  Several  other  candi- 
dates were  successively  proposed  by  Jay,  but  the 
Council  refused  them  all,  at  the  same  time  insisting  that 
the  Governor,  as  president  of  the  Council,  must  make 
the  appointment.  In  the  end  Jay  yielded  and  under 
protest  named  Hale,  who  was  promptly  confirmed  by 
the  Council.  Hale  proved  to  be  an  excellent  officer, 
and  Jay,  with  characteristic  frankness  and  honor,  soon 
wrote  to  both  Hale  and  White  his  admission  that  he 
had  been  wrong  in  opposing  the  appointment. 

The  Legislature  on  April  3  passed  the  first  law  of 
New  York  forbidding  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors 
on  Sunday,  and  three  days  later  it  adjourned  without 
day  in  the  midst  of  a  vigorous  and  animated  political 
campaign. 

Governor  Jay's  term  of  office  was  approaching  its 
close.  His  administration  had  been  notably  pure, 
industrious,  and  useful.  It  had  been  marked  with  a 
finely  conciliatory  spirit  in  party  politics,  with  a  vast 


168  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1798 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

amount  of  constructive  legislation,  and  with  a  great 
advance  and  uplifting  of  the  general  standard  of  public 
service.  It  was  distinctively  the  administration  not 
only  of  one  of  the  purest  and  most  unselfish  of  patriots 
but  also  of  one  in  whom  the  politician  was  lost  in  the 
very  highest  type  of  statesman.  Never  did  any  Gover- 
nor more  richly  deserved  undisputed  reelection,  and 
never  was  such  a  course  more  clearly  prescribed  by  the 
public  welfare.  Yet  such  was  not  to  be  the  case.  He 
was  opposed  in  the  campaign  by  a  candidate  who  was 
one  of  the  few  public  men  in  the  State  worthy  to  be 
ranked  with  or  near  him  in  character  and  ability. 

A  largely  attended  meeting  of  the  Federalist  leaders 
from  all  parts  of  the  State  was  held  on  March  6,  1798, 
at  which  it  was  unhesitatingly  agreed  to  put  forward 
both  Jay  and  Van  Rensselaer  for  reelection.  A  few 
days  later  Robert  R.  Livingston,  Chancellor  of  the 
State,  announced  himself  as  an  opposing  candidate,  and 
was  thereupon  made  the  standard-bearer  of  the  party 
of  the  Democracy.  This  was  a  surprise  to  the  State,  and 
a  particularly  unpleasant  surprise  to  Jay  on  personal 
grounds.  Livingston  was  Mrs.  Jay's  cousin.  The  two 
men  had  been  close  life-long  friends,  law  partners,  and 
colleagues  in  Congress,  in  the  organization  of  the  State 
government,  and  in  the  ratification  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution. They  had  worked  together  for  the  defeat  of 
Clinton  at  the  Poughkeepsie  Convention  at  which  the 
Constitution  was  ratified.  But,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  Livingston  was  bitterly  disappointed  at  being 
passed  over  in  favor  of  Jay  when  the  first  Chief-Justice 
of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  was  named,  and  he 


1798]  JOHN  JAY  169 

visited  his  resentment  upon  Jay  himself  as  well  as 
Hamilton.  Jay's  treaty  with  Great  Britain  gave  him 
fresh  opportunity  for  hostility.  He  raged  against  it  in 
print;  he  joined  Aaron  Burr  in  denouncing  it  and 
denouncing  Jay  personally  from  the  platform;  he  par- 
ticipated in  the  burning  of  the  treaty  before  Jay's  house, 
while  his  brother,  Brockholst  Livingston,  joined  in 
throwing  brickbats  at  Hamilton  and  in  burning  John 
Jay  in  effigy.  Now,  in  the  midst  of  our  undeclared  war 
with  France,  and  when  the  French  government  was 
acting  in  the  most  scandalous  manner  toward  America, 
Livingston  surpassed  even  Jefferson  and  Monroe  in  his 
pro-Gallican  passion. 

Tantaene  animis  coelestibus  irae?  For  withal  Liv- 
ingston was  the  possessor  of  a  well-nigh  celestial  mind. 
In  intellectual  versatility  and  opulence  of  power,  in 
social  graces  and  personal  charm,  in  public  and  private 
dignity,  in  a  certain  spiritual  exaltation  that  illumined 
his  physical  being  with  lustre,  he  was  deservedly  con- 
spicuous even  in  an  age  in  which  were  clustered  many 
of  the  greatest  men  in  American  history.  Nor  was  there 
one  of  loftier  integrity  or  more  efficient  devotion  to  the 
public  service.  Yet  because  of  the  unworthy  motives 
which  we  have  defined,  and  particularly  because  of  the 
two  most  unworthy — personal  animosity,  and  partisan- 
ship for  the  alien  land  that  was  then  our  foe — he 
elected  to  oppose  Jay's  reelection.  We  can  imagine  the 
sardonic  humor  with  which  George  Clinton  in  his  tem- 
porary retirement  regarded  this  conflict  between  the 
two  men  who  had  inflicted  upon  him  the  first  great 
defeat  of  his  career! 


170  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1798 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Jay  did  not  shrink  from  the  contest.  It  was  unspeak- 
ably painful  to  him  to  be  opposed  by  one  who  for  so 
long  had  stood  so  close  to  him,  and  on  personal  consid- 
erations he  would  gladly  have  retired.  But  on  the 
ground  of  Americanism  against  Gallicism,  of  sustaining 
the  American  government  against  the  obsession  of  the 
French  frenzy,  there  could  be  no  compromise  and  no 
retreat.  "The  indignities  which  France  was  heaping 
upon  his  country,"  says  his  son  and  biographer,  "and 
the  probability  that  they  would  soon  lead  to  war,  for- 
bade him  to  consult  his  personal  gratification."  More- 
over, Jay  doubtless  recognized  in  Livingston's  can- 
didacy a  bid  for  the  Presidency  two  years  later,  and 
while  in  most  respects  the  Chancellor  would  have  been 
a  worthy  Chief  Magistrate,  it  would  have  been  most 
ominous  to  elect  to  that  office  a  man  capable  of  per- 
mitting alien  partisanship  to  influence  his  course  in 
domestic  affairs.  To  oppose  Livingston,  therefore, 
both  as  an  actual  candidate  for  the  Governorship  and  as 
a  prospective  candidate  for  the  Presidency,  was  Jay's 
plain  duty. 

Livingston  was  confident  of  success.  The  gains 
which  the  Democracy  had  made  in  legislative  elections 
persuaded  him  that  the  tide  was  rising  strongly  in  their 
favor.  Aristocrat  though  he  was  himself,  too,  he 
counted  upon  a  revolt  of  the  people  against  the  "court" 
that  Washington  had  maintained  at  the  capital  and  that 
Adams  was  continuing,  and  against  the  making  of  a 
treaty  with  monarchical  England  rather  than  with 
republican  France.  In  this  he  was  mistaken. 


1798]  JOHN  JAY  171 

He  did  not  realize  the  force  of  the  patriotic  sentiment 
that  was  rising  throughout  New  York  as  elsewhere 
against  the  insulting  aggressions  of  the  French  Direc- 
tory. Even  Adams's  publication  of  the  proofs  of 
Talleyrand's  attempt  to  blackmail  the  United  States  into 
paying  him  a  bribe  and  France  a  tribute,  under  threat 
of  ravaging  our  coast  with  French  frigates,  did  not  open 
the  ambition-blinded  eyes ;  nor  did  the  national  response 
to  Pinckney's  ringing  "Millions  for  defense,  but  not  a 
cent  for  tribute"  penetrate  his  deafened  ears. 

The  result  was  inevitable.  Congress  created  a  Navy 
department  and  ordered  the  building  of  a  navy,  the 
army  was  mobilized  and  Washington  was  recalled  from 
his  retirement  to  command  it,  "Hail,  Columbia!" 
became  the  national  war-song,  and  the  whole  nation  rose 
in  support  of  its  rights  and  honor.  In  the  midst  of  such 
doings,  the  New  York  election  was  held.  Jay  received 
16,012  votes  and  Livington  13,632.  The  disappointment 
to  Livingston  was  intense  and  it  embittered  the  remain- 
der of  his  life,  though  there  were  still  reserved  for  his 
achievement  perhaps  the  greatest  two  public  services 
of  his  useful  and  distinguished  career,  in  the  Louisiana 
Purchase  and  the  development  of  steam  navigation. 
But  with  his  crushing  defeat  at  the  hands  of  Jay  his 
influence  in  the  politics  and  upon  the  destinies  of  New 
York  was  ended. 


CHAPTER  IX 
JAY'S  SECOND  TERM 

IT  was  inevitable  that  in  1798  national  and  inter- 
national affairs  should  dominate  all  others.  It  was 
indeed  appropriate  that  it  should  be  so.  In  its 
relations  with  France  the  young  republic  was  passing 
through  the  most  crucial  vicissitudes  it  had  known  since 
the  Revolution.  A  state  of  war  actually  existed;  there 
was  ample  provocation  on  the  American  side  for  a 
formal  declaration  of  it;  and  the  result  of  the  Pinckney- 
Marshall-Gerry  mission  to  France,  in  which  the 
grossest  of  insults  had  been  added  to  intolerable  injury, 
made  it  seem  certain  that  such  a  declaration  would 
speedily  ensue.  One  man  alone  prevented  it,  and  he  did 
so  because  he  knew  that  in  the  then  defenseless  condi- 
tion of  the  seaboard  cities  such  a  war,  whatever  its 
ultimate  result,  would  at  first  be  unspeakably  disastrous 
to  America.  That  was  before  Trafalgar.  It  was  before 
the  Nile.  France  had  still  a  powerful  navy,  only  a  little 
surpassed  by  that  of  England,  and  with  it  she  could  have 
ravaged  New  York,  Boston,  Philadelphia,  and  the 
whole  coast. 

Adams  was  not  for  peace  at  any  price.  Indeed,  that 
passionate  patriot  was  the  very  antithesis  of  a  pacifist. 
He  would  have  gloried  with  avidity  and  zeal  in  taking 
up  arms  for  the  protection  and  vindication  of  American 
rights.  But — like  other  members  of  his  illustrious 

172 


1798]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  173 

family — if  he  had  a  heart  of  fire,  he  had  a  brain  of  ice. 
Nobody  could  be  more  irascible  and  impetuous ;  nobody 
could  be  at  the  same  time  more  cool  and  calculating  or 
exercise  more  inexorable  self-control.  Certainly  nobody 
could  be  more  unselfish  and  self-immolatory.  So,  at  the 
conscious  cost  of  his  whole  political  future,  the  great 
President  stood  like  a  wall  of  adamant  between  his 
unready  country  and  a  disastrous  war.  In  this  he  did 
not  mollify  his  pro-Gallican  enemies,  who  with 
astounding  inconsistency  continued  to  denounce  him  as 
pro-English,  which  was  the  very  last  thing  John  Adams 
could  ever  have  been.  On  the  other  hand,  he  alienated 
a  large  faction  of  his  own  party,  including  Hamilton, 
who  would  have  entered  the  war  relying  upon  English 
aid.  But  Adams  wisely  distrusted  any  such  reliance, 
knowing  well  that  nothing  could  at  that  time  suit 
England's  book  better  than  to  have  the  United  States 
suffer  disaster  and  be  severely  checked  in  the  marvelous 
progress  which  it  was  making  toward  domination  of  the 
western  hemisphere. 

In  his  noble  course,  which  happily  was  successful  for 
the  nation  though  ruinous  politically  to  himself, 
Adams  was  cordially  supported  by  Jay,  who  was  much 
more  loyally  attached  to  him  than  was  Hamilton,  and 
who  indeed  was  in  diplomacy  and  foreign  relations 
generally  a  wiser  counsellor  and  more  prescient  states- 
man than  the  latter.  As  New  York,  through  her  com- 
merce, was  suffering  most  from  the  misconduct  of 
France,  and  because  of  her  exposed  and  undefended 
condition  would  suffer  most  in  case  of  open  war,  the 
crisis  was  of  supreme  interest  in  this  State,  and  it  was 


174  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1798 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

natural  and  fitting  that  Jay,  soon  after  his  reelection, 
should  call  the  Legislature  together  in  special  session, 
partly  to  arouse  and  consolidate  sentiment  in  support 
of  the  President,  and  partly  to  take  specific  measures  of 
preparation  for  possible  contingencies. 

He  accordingly,  on  July  2,  1798,  issued  a  proclama- 
tion summoning  the  Twenty-second  Legislature  to  meet 
at  Albany  on  August  9 — just  a  week  after  that  crushing 
disaster  of  the  Nile  which  made  France  far  less  inclined 
than  she  had  been  to  push  hostilities  against  America 
to  the  extreme.  In  his  opening  address  he  gave  the 
threatening  state  of  national  relations  with  France  as 
the  reason  for  convoking  the  Legislature,  and  he  dwelt 
briefly  but  with  admirable  clarity  and  discretion  upon 
the  existing  situation  and  the  train  of  events  and 
negotiations  that  had  led  to  it.  The  whole  business, 
he  said,  belonged  to  the  national  government.  Yet 
there  was  a  question  to  what  extent  the  safety  and  essen- 
tial interests  of  the  State  of  New  York  required 
auxiliary  and  correspondent  measures  to  be  taken  on 
her  part,  and  it  was  one  which  should  be  considered  and 
answered  by  the  Legislature  rather  than  by  the  Gov- 
ernor. He  urged  no  policy  of  his  own,  but  asked  the 
Legislature  to  consider  carefully  the  need  of  defenses 
for  the  State's  one  great  ocean  port,  the  need  of  arsenals, 
and  the  need  of  revision  of  the  Militia  law.  Much 
expense  might  be  involved,  but  when  security  was 
at  stake  the  expense  of  providing  it  was  a  secondary 
consideration. 

To  meet  such  expense,  and  indeed  to  pay  the  existing 
debts  of  the  State,  he  earnestly  advised  a  revision  of  the 


1798]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  175 

tax  laws  which  would  compel  all  citizens  to  bear  their 
just  shares  of  the  public  burden.  "Too  many  of  our 
citizens,"  he  said,  "seem  to  have  inadvertently  flattered 
themselves  that,  unlike  all  other  people  past  and  present, 
they  were  to  live  exempt  from  taxes."  Because  of  that 
error  the  State  was  in  debt  and  was  paying  interest  on 
loans  which  should  not  have  been  made,  but  should 
have  been  obviated  by  raising  the  money  by  taxation. 
He  added  the  pertinent  reflection  that  citizens  ought  not 
to  object  to  taxation  levied  by  the  Legislature,  since  "all 
the  officers  of  the  government,  and  every  member  of  the 
Legislature,  must  partake  in  its  inconvenience."  Jay 
himself  was,  it  should  be  recalled,  a  very  large  taxpayer, 
and  was  thus  advocating  an  increase  of  his  own  burden. 
The  sequel  to  his  wise  counsel  was  the  enactment,  on 
April  1,  1799,  of  a  general  Tax  law.  Meanwhile,  on 
August  27,  1798,  the  Legislature  appropriated  $150,000 
for  the  fortification  of  New  York  City,  and  $165,000  for 
arsenals,  arms,  and  military  stores. 

There  was  in  Jay's  admirable  address  nothing  that 
could  be  regarded  as  partisan,  unless  in  a  single  sentence 
of  warning  against  partisanship.  Referring  to  the 
imminent  danger  of  war,  he  said :  "The  United  States 
cannot  be  conquered  but  by  civil  discord  under  foreign 
direction;  and  it  is  useful  to  recollect  that  to  this  cause 
all  fallen  republics  have  owed  their  destruction."  His 
utterances  had  in  gratifying  measure  the  effect  for 
which  they  were  designed.  That  was  not  to  inflame 
passions  against  France,  but  to  strengthen  loyal  support 
of  the  President;  not  to  exacerbate  partisan  animosities, 
but  to  allay  them  and  to  unite  all  parties  in  that  unity 


176  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1799 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

which  should  prevail  in  respect  to  external  relations. 
In  consequence,  no  partisan  strife  arose  in  that  session 
of  the  Legislature. 

The  only  party  division  was  over  the  election  of  a 
United  States  Senator  to  succeed  General  North,  who 
had  been  appointed  ad  interim  in  place  of  Mr.  Hobart, 
resigned.  The  Legislature  elected  James  Watson  by 
fifty-seven  votes  over  John  Tayler,  who  received  forty- 
eight.  These  figures  represented  the  respective  strengths 
of  the  two  parties  in  that  Legislature.  On  August  27  an 
adjournment  was  voted  to  January  2,  1799.  The  meet- 
ing actually  began  on  January  3. 

In  this  second  meeting  of  the  Twenty-second  Legisla- 
ture, the  floodgates  of  partisanship  were  opened.  First 
the  Assembly  elected  a  new  Council  of  Appointment, 
consisting  of  three  Federalists  and  one  of  the  opposition, 
the  last  named  being  necessarily  chosen  because  there 
was  no  Federalist  Senator  from  the  Southern  district. 
Next  a  resolution  was  introduced  for  the  division  of  the 
State  into  districts  for  the  election  of  Presidential 
Electors  and  also  into  Senatorial  districts  from  each  of 
which  one  State  Senator  should  be  chosen — as  at  the 
present  time.  This  was  really  a  scheme  of  the  Democ- 
racy, that  party  hoping  thus  in  the  Presidential  con- 
test of  1800  to  secure  some  Electors  from  the  districts  in 
the  southern  part  of  the  State,  which  they  would  have 
little  chance  of  doing  if  all  were  chosen  on  a  general 
State  ticket.  Despite  the  Federalist  majority  in  the 
Assembly,  the  measure  passed  that  house  by  a  vote  of 
55  to  40,  because  of  the  action  of  a  number  of  nominal 
Federalists  who  were  much  under  the  influence  of 


AARON  BURR 

Aaron  Burr,  U.  S.  senator;  born  in  Newark,  N.  J.,  February 
6,  1756;  studied  theology,  but  abandoned  it  for  law;  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  many  battles  of  the  revolution;  member 
of  the  legislature,  1784,  1798,  1800;  attorney  general,  1789-90; 
U.  S.  senator,  1791-97;  president  of  state  constitutional  con- 
vention, 1801;  tied  Jefferson  in  presidential  election  of  1800; 
house  of  representatives  declared  Jefferson  elected  president 
and  Burr  vice-president;  challenged  and  mortally  wounded 
Alexander  Hamilton  in  a  duel  at  Weehawken,  N.  J.,  July  11, 
1804;  coroner's  jury  returned  a  verdict  of  murder;  escaped 
to  South  Carolina;  returned  to  Washington  and  completed 
term  as  vice-president;  arrested  and  tried  for  treason  in 
August,  1807  for  attempting  to  form  a  republic  in  the  south- 
west of  which  he  was  to  be  head,  but  was  acquitted ;  went 
abroad  in  1808;  returned  to  New  York  City  in  1812;  died  in 
Port  Richmond,  S.  I.,  September  14,  1836. 


1799]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  177 

Aaron  Burr  and  were  led  by  him  on  this  and  some  other 
matters  to  desert  their  party.  The  measure  was,  how- 
ever, rejected  by  the  Senate. 

The  Governor  reported  to  the  Legislature  certain 
amendments  to  the  Federal  Constitution  which  were 
proposed  by  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  cal- 
culated to  restrict  the  citizenship  privileges  of  aliens. 
These  were  discussed  at  much  length  in  the  Assembly, 
on  partisan  lines,  the  Federalists  favoring  and  the 
opposition  disapproving  them,  and  they  were  finally 
rejected  by  a  vote  of  38  for  and  62  against  them;  this 
result  being  achieved,  as  was  that  on  the  districting 
proposal,  through  the  influence  of  Burr,  who  was  at  this 
time  a  member  of  the  Assembly  and  though  nominally 
independent  was  in  fact  a  leader  of  the  Democracy. 

Next  came  the  great  fight  of  the  session.  The  Gov- 
ernor reported  to  the  Legislature  the  famous  Virginia 
and  Kentucky  resolutions,  directed  against  the  Alien 
and  Sedition  laws.  There  can  be  no  question  that  those 
laws  were  extreme  and  were  susceptible  of  intolerable 
abuse;  though  neither  can  there  be  any  question  that 
their  purpose  was  laudable,  for  the  suppression  of 
treasonable  intrigues  which  were  threatening  the 
integrity  and  life  of  the  nation.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
resolutions  were  no  less  extreme,  and  were  calculated  to 
impair  the  integrity  of  the  national  government.  The 
Virginia  resolutions,  drafted  by  James  Madison  and 
adopted  by  the  Virginia  Legislature,  denounced  the 
laws  as  "palpable  and  alarming  infractions  of  the  Con- 
stitution" ;  a  declaration  which  had  its  chief  force  in  the 
fact  that  Madison  had  been,  comparably  with  Ham- 


178  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1799 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ilton,  a  chief  author  of  the  Constitution  and  was  there- 
fore well  qualified  to  interpret  it,  though  in  making  this 
declaration  he  was  probably  much  under  the  influence 
of  Jefferson.  The  Kentucky  resolutions,  which  were 
drafted  by  Jefferson  himself,  were  still  more  radical, 
declaring  the  laws  to  be  "not  law,  but  altogether  void 
and  of  no  force." 

In  making  that  astounding  declaration  Jefferson 
overreached  himself.  Without  it,  some  resolutions 
disapproving  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws  might  have 
passed  the  Legislatures  of  New  York  and  other 
northern  States.  But  Jefferson's  dictum  was  flat  nulli- 
fication. More  than  that,  it  was  palpably  unreasonable 
for  a  State  Legislature  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  an  act  of 
the  national  Congress.  The  leaders  of  the  Democracy 
themselves  afterward  were  most  vehement  in  trying  to 
deny  the  right  and  power  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  to  reject  acts  of  Congress  as  unconsti- 
tutional. Certainly  there  was  far  more  cause  to  deny 
such  right  and  power  to  a  State  Legislature. 

The  debate  at  Albany  over  these  resolutions  was  by 
far  the  greatest  political  battle  that  had  thus  far  been 
waged  in  the  New  York  Legislature.  In  the  Assembly 
it  was  largely  directed  by  Burr  on  the  side  of  the 
Democracy,  though  the  real  protagonist  was  one  of 
Burr's  proteges,  a  younger  but  far  abler  man.  This  was 
Erastus  Root,  formerly  of  Connecticut.  He  was  only 
twenty-six  years  old;  he  had  formerly  been  chiefly 
known  as  a  champion  athlete;  and  in  politics  he  had 
been  regarded  as  an  irresponsible  enfant  terrible.  But  in 
a  day  he  placed  himself  in  the  very  forefront  of  New 


1799]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  179 

York  political  leaders  as  a  tribune  of  the  people  and  the 
spokesman  of  advanced  democracy.  In  brilliancy  of 
oratory  and  keen  and  cogent  logic  he  far  surpassed 
Burr,  if  not  all  of  his  colleagues  at  Albany.  He  con- 
tended with  all  the  force  of  his  magnetic  and  masterful 
personality  for  the  right  of  the  people,  through  their 
representatives  in  State  Legislatures,  to  express  their 
opinion  of  any  act  of  Congress.  In  that  he  was  doubtless 
right,  and  had  that  been  the  only  point  at  issue  he  would 
probably  have  won  the  day  and  secured  New  York's 
approval  of  the  resolutions.  But  that  was  not  all.  The 
resolutions  contained  Jefferson's  declaration  in  favor 
of  State  nullification,  at  will,  of  acts  of  Congress,  and 
though  those  specific  clauses  were  in  the  course  of  the 
controversy  stricken  out,  the  spirit  of  them  remained. 
This  was  something  which  Mr.  Root  did  not  venture  to 
defend.  He  therefore  altogether  ignored  it.  Doubtless 
he  did  not  himself  approve  it.  At  any  rate,  years  after- 
ward, when  the  same  principle  was  again  put  forward 
in  South  Carolina  by  John  C.  Calhoun,  he  was  one  of 
the  very  foremost  and  most  vehement  in  opposing  and 
condemning  it. 

In  the  Senate  the  advocacy  of  the  resolutions  was  led 
by  Ambrose  Spencer,  a  Senator  from  the  Middle  dis- 
trict, and  thitherto  one  of  the  most  zealous  Federalists, 
who  now  deserted  that  party  and  cast  in  his  lot  with 
the  Democracy.  He  was  charged  by  his  former  asso- 
ciates with  doing  this  through  disappointment  and 
resentment  at  not  being  appointed  Comptroller  of  the 
State,  a  charge  which  he  indignantly  denied,  declaring 
that  he  had  announced  his  change  of  views  long  before 


180  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1799 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  appointment  of  Mr.  Jones  as  Comptroller,  and 
indeed  before  his  own  reelection  that  year  to  the  Senate. 
Nevertheless  it  was  a  matter  of  record  that  he  criticized 
the  appointment  of  Mr.  Jones  with  undisguised  per- 
sonal bitterness,  and  moved  for  having  his  seat  declared 
vacant  in  the  Senate  because  of  his  acceptance  of  the 
Comptrollership.  It  must  be  remembered,  too,  that 
Spencer  was  related  to  Chancellor  Livingston,  and  it  is 
not  unreasonable  or  unjust  to  assume  that  he  was  to 
some  extent  influenced  by  him  in  his  political  course. 
He  was  at  that  time  only  thirty-three  years  old,  but  had 
already  served  as  an  Assistant- Attorney-General  of  the 
State,  a  State  Senator,  and  a  member  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment,  and  had  long  been  a  close  friend  and 
adviser  of  both  Jay  and  Hamilton. 

The  Federalists  introduced  into  each  house  resolu- 
tions declaring  that  they  could  not  perceive  that  the 
rights  of  the  States  had  been  violated  by  the  Alien  and 
Sedition  laws,  or  that  any  unconstitutional  powers  had 
been  assumed  by  the  national  government;  expressing 
"anxiety  and  regret"  at  the  "inflammatory  and  per- 
nicious sentiments  and  doctrines"  which  were  contained 
in  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolutions,  "sentiments 
and  doctrines  no  less  repugnant  to  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  and  the  principles  of  their  Union 
than  destructive  to  the  Federal  government  and  unjust 
to  those  whom  the  people  have  elected  to  administer 
it";  bearing  "unequivocal  testimony  against  such  senti- 
ments and  doctrines";  and  proclaiming  it  an  indispen- 
sable duty  to  declare  their  incompetence,  as  a  branch  of 
the  Legislature  of  the  State,  to  supervise  the  acts  of  the 


1799] 


JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  181 


general  government.  These  resolutions  were  adopted 
in  the  Assembly  by  a  vote  of  fifty  to  forty-three,  and  in 
the  Senate  by  a  much  larger  majority,  there  being  only 
seven  votes  against  them. 

It  may  be  added  that  the  Senate  and  Assembly 
adopted  resolutions  respecting  the  President's  French 
policy  instinct  with  fine  patriotism,  which  evoked  from 
Mr.  Adams  an  appreciative  and  grateful  response,  in 
which  he  remarked  that  they  were  the  more  welcome  to 
him  because  transmitted  by  a  man  for  whom  he  had  the 
warm  and  affectionate  regard  that  he  had  for  John  Jay. 
Later,  however,  when  Adams  appointed  Vans  Murray 
to  be  Minister  to  France  and  thus  renewed  diplomatic 
relations  with  that  country,  the  Assembly  refused  to 
adopt  an  address  of  thanks  to  him  which  was  moved  by 
Mr.  Swartwout.  This  refusal  was  not  at  all  to  Jay's 
liking  and  was  contrary  to  his  judgment  as  a  piece  of 
political  tactics,  but  it  was  dictated  by  Hamilton,  who 
controlled  a  considerable  following  in  the  Legislature 
and  who  had  decided  to  break  entirely  with  Adams. 
After  this  strenuous  political  session  the  Legislature 
rejected  a  bill  for  the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery,  and 
also  one  for  the  abolition  of  imprisonment  for  debt 
arising  from  contract;  it  passed  a  bill  for  "supplying 
the  city  of  New  York  with  pure  and  wholesome  water," 
which  was  really  a  bill  for  chartering  the  Manhattan 
Banking  Company,  in  the  interest  of  Burr  and  his 
friends;  and  on  April  3  it  adjourned  without  day. 

Later  in  that  month  occurred  the  annual  election  for 
members  of  the  Assembly,  in  which,  contrary  to  antici- 
pation, the  Federalists  made  marked  gains.  These  were 


182  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1799 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

especially  noteworthy  in  New  York  City,  which  had  for 
two  years  preceding  been  solidly  for  the  opposition 
party,  but  now  went  Federalist  by  an  overwhelming 
majority.  This  was  not  so  much  in  spite  of  as  because 
of  the  fact  that  Burr  himself  again  headed  the  opposi- 
tion ticket.  The  people  had  discovered  the  deceptive 
character  of  the  water  bill  which  Burr  had  manoeuvered 
through  the  Legislature  under  false  pretenses.  The 
majority  of  the  Legislature  and  the  public  had  supposed 
it  to  be  what  it  purported  to  be,  a  measure  for  supplying 
the  city  with  water.  It  did  indeed  provide  for  that,  in 
a  very  inadequate  fashion,  but  its  real  intent  was  to 
charter  a  bank  which  would  not  only  enrich  Burr  and 
his  friends  but  could  also  be  used  as  a  powerful  political 
machine.  The  anger  of  the  people  at  the  exposure  of 
this  characteristic  duplicity  of  Burr  resulted  in  that 
trickster's  crushing  defeat  at  the  polls.  In  Columbia 
county  the  Federalists  also  made  gains,  but  elsewhere 
the  drift  was  against  them. 

A  wise  and  temperate  use  of  the  advantages  thus 
gained  might  have  assured  to  the  Federalists  a  perma- 
nent, or  at  least  a  protracted,  lease  of  power.  This 
would  doubtless  have  been  the  case  had  the  counsels  of 
Jay  prevailed.  But  it  was  not  to  be.  Various  Federalist 
leaders  and  officials  throughout  the  State,  devoid  of  his 
judicial  temperament,  discerning  vision,  and  concilia- 
tory inclinations,  ignored  the  obvious  fact  that  the 
victory  at  the  polls  in  April  had  been  won  not  because 
of  but  in  spite  of  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  and 
chiefly  because  of  the  exposure  of  Burr's  duplicity  and 
"graft,"  and  interpreted  the  result  as  a  popular  ratifica- 


1799]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  183 

tion  of  the  laws  in  question  and  a  mandate  for  their 
unrelenting  application.  Accordingly  a  campaign  was 
begun  which  in  some  cases  amounted  to  nothing  short  of 
oppressive  persecution. 

One  of  the  most  extreme  cases  was  that  of  Jedediah 
Peck,  Judge  of  Otsego  county,  a  man  of  peculiar  and 
in  some  respects  insignificant  personality,  but  of  high 
integrity,  benevolence,  and  public  spirit.  It  was  he  who 
had  moved  for  the  abolition  of  imprisonment  for 
contract  debts,  and  he  was  also  one  of  the  most  efficient 
advocates  of  the  development  of  an  adequate  system  of 
free  public  instruction.  General  John  Armstrong  had 
written  an  appeal  to  Congress  for  the  repeal  of  the  Alien 
and  Sedition  laws,  couched  in  language  which  was 
bitter  and  even  savage  to  an  extreme  degree.  His 
authorship  of  it  was  kept  secret,  but  the  petition  was 
widely  circulated,  ostensibly  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
signatures  to  be  presented  to  Congress,  but  of  course 
really  for  the  purpose  of  political  propaganda.  Its 
intemperate  phrases  were  intended  not  for  Congress,  to 
which  indeed  they  would  have  been  more  offensive  than 
appealing,  but  for  the  general  public,  and  especially  for 
that  part  of  the  public  that  was  most  readily  moved 
by  passion.  It  was  not  an  admirable  document,  but  it 
was  certainly  not  libelous  or  seditious  in  any  reasonable 
sense. 

Armstrong  sent  copies  of  this  document  to  Judge 
Peck,  and  that  gentleman  distributed  them  to  his  neigh- 
bors for  their  perusal  and  signature.  This  came  to  the 
notice  of  Judge  Cooper,  of  Cooperstown,  who  appears 
to  have  been  endowed  with  a  degree  of  the  arbitrary 


184  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1799 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

and  contentious  spirit  that  characterized  his  more 
famous  son,  the  novelist.  He  brought  the  matter  to  the 
attention  of  the  United  States  District  Attorney,  Mr. 
Harrison,  and  demanded  that  the  rigors  of  the  very 
law  which  he  was  flouting  should  immediately  be 
visited  upon  Judge  Peck.  Whether  through  weak  com- 
pliance with  Judge  Cooper's  impassioned  demand,  or 
because  of  a  kindred  spirit  of  zeal  against  the  Democ- 
racy, Mr.  Harrison  promptly  adopted  the  course 
suggested.  He  laid  the  case  before  the  Federal  grand 
jury  and  demanded  an  indictment  of  Judge  Peck  under 
the  Sedition  law.  This  was  granted,  and  a  bench 
warrant  was  issued  for  the  arrest  of  the  culprit  and  his 
transportation  to  New  York  City  for  trial. 

The  circumstances  of  that  ill-advised  undertaking 
were  doubtless  much  exaggerated  by  the  Democratic 
press.  We  can  scarcely  believe  that  Judge  Peck,  a 
physically  slight  and  non-belligerent  man,  was  taken 
from  his  bed  at  midnight,  manacled,  and  dragged  from 
his  home.  But  at  least  he  was  arrested  by  a  United 
States  Marshal,  and  was  conveyed  by  him  as  a  prisoner 
from  Cooperstown  to  New  York,  a  distance  of  two 
hundred  miles.  It  took  five  days  to  make  the  journey, 
which  might  not  unfittingly  be  described  as  the  funeral 
procession  of  the  Federalists.  Scarcely  anything  could 
more  have  excited  public  opinion  against  the  Sedition 
law  and  against  the  party  that  was  regarded  as 
responsible  for  it.  The  facts  that  there  was  actual 
sedition  to  be  suppressed,  that  treasonable  conspiracies 
existed,  and  that  Armstrong's  alleged  "petition"  was  in 
very  bad  taste,  were  quite  overlooked.  The  people  saw 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  185 

in  Jedediah  Peck  a  martyr  to  free  speech,  freedom  of 
the  press,  and  the  right  to  petition.  That  exhibition, 
just  before  the  spring  election  of  1800,  was  the  most 
effective  campaign  propaganda  that  Burr  could  have 
wished. 

The  result  of  that  election  was  a  sweeping  victory  for 
the  Democracy,  in  New  York  as  elsewhere  throughout 
the  country.  The  city  of  New  York,  ignoring  Burr's 
water  bill  job,  turned  its  Federalist  majority  of  nine 
hundred  of  the  year  before  into  a  contrary  majority  of 
similar  proportions.  In  the  Eastern  district  alone  were 
Federalist  Senators  elected,  and  the  majority  of  that 
party  in  the  Senate  was  reduced  to  seven,  while  the 
Democracy  gained  control  of  the  Assembly  by  a 
majority  of  28.  The  latter  party  also  carried  six  of  the 
ten  Congressional  districts.  It  is  probable  that  the  local 
victory  in  New  York  City  was  largely  due  to  the 
personality  of  the  candidates  of  the  Democracy,  who 
were  practically  all  men  of  wealth  and  high  standing 
and  devoid  of  political  offense.  Burr  himself  discreetly 
kept  off  the  ticket.  In  his  place,  the  former  Governor, 
George  Clinton,  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  list,  thus 
assuring  the  support  of  the  Clinton  clan.  Next  came 
Brockholst  Livingston,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most 
popular  members  of  that  family,  to  rally  the  Livingston 
clan  to  the  fray.  John  Swartwout,  the  closest  friend  of 
Burr,  was  put  upon  the  ticket  in  Orange  county,  to 
assure  the  support  of  all  of  Burr's  partisans.  General 
Horatio  Gates  was  nominated,  to  cater  to  the  former 
soldiers  of  the  Revolution.  Other  candidates  were 
Samuel  Osgood,  who  had  been  Postmaster-General ; 


186  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Henry  Rutgers,  and  John  Broome,  who  was  afterward 
Lieutenant-Governor  of  the  State.  These  candidates 
were  chiefly  selected  by  Burr  himself,  with  the  greatest 
discretion  ever  exercised  by  him  in  his  career  as  a 
political  "boss."  The  "slate"  was  arranged  by  Burr  and 
Clinton  personally  at  a  secret  conference  in  New  York 
City  only  a  week  before  the  election. 

Another  incident  which  undoubtedly  added  to  the 
discomfiture  of  the  Federalists  at  the  spring  election  of 
1800  was  the  death  of  Washington,  in  December,  1799. 
So  long  as  he  lived  his  name  was  a  tower  of  strength 
to  the  Federalists.  Only  Burr  and  a  few  lesser  men 
ever  ventured  to  asperse  his  character,  motives,  or 
sagacity.  Even  Jefferson,  much  as  he  disliked  him  and 
disagreed  with  him,  was  constrained  to  treat  him  with 
respect.  And  because  of  unwillingness  to  seem  to 
oppose  him,  many  refrained  from  the  aggressive 
antagonism  to  the  Federalist  party  which  they  otherwise 
would  have  manifested.  But  after  his  death  that 
restraint  was  removed. 

The  importance  of  the  spring  campaign  was  recog- 
nized on  both  sides.  Presidential  Electors  were  to  be 
chosen  the  following  fall,  and  it  was  expected  that  the 
contest  would  be  so  close  that  the  twelve  votes  of  New 
York  in  the  Electoral  College  would  determine  the 
choice  of  President.  As  the  Electors  in  New  York  were 
then  chosen  by  the  Legislature,  that  party  which  won 
control  of  the  Legislature  in  April  would  probably  elect 
the  next  President  of  the  United  States.  No  wonder 
that  Burr,  who  meant  to  be  President,  exercised  all  his 
extraordinary  ingenuity  in  arranging  the  ticket  and  all 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  187 

his  plausibility  in  making  public  appeals  to  the  people 
in  those  places  where  he  had  incurred  least  odium  for 
his  Manhattan  Bank  trickery.  For  the  first  time  in 
New  York  he  organized  a  political  "machine,"  with 
ward  and  district  managers,  mass-meetings,  personal 
canvassing  of  the  lists  of  voters,  and  the  other  methods 
that  have  since  been  familiar  in  campaigns.  In  fact 
it  may  truly  be  said  that  "machine"  methods  in  party 
management  and  in  the  conduct  of  electoral  campaigns 
date,  in  New  York  State,  and  especially  in  New  York 
City,  from  Burr's  activities  in  the  spring  of  1800. 

Nor  was  Hamilton  less  active,  though  in  a  different 
way.  Unfitted  for  such  work  as  that  in  which  his  great 
rival  excelled,  he  addressed  himself  chiefly  to  the 
people  in  a  series  of  campaign  addresses  which  for 
eloquence,  logic,  and  lofty  political  ideals  have  not  been 
surpassed  in  any  political  contest  in  the  State.  He  did 
not  attempt  to  defend  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  of 
which  in  fact  he  never  approved.  He  was  too  good  a 
lawyer  to  sanction  the  extreme  prosecution  of  men  for 
freedom  or  even  for  license  of  speech,  and  as  an  alien 
himself  he  was  opposed  to  invidious  discrimination 
against  the  foreign-born.  He  regarded  with  entire  dis- 
favor such  proceedings  as  the  prosecution  of  Judge 
Peck.  "Let  us  not  establish  a  tyranny,"  he  wrote.  "Let 
us  not  be  cruel  or  violent."  Nevertheless,  it  was 
impossible  for  him  to  escape  a  large  measure  of  imputed 
though  undeserved  responsibility  for  those  hated  laws 
and  the  excesses  that  had  been  practiced  under  them. 

Meantime  the  Twenty-third  Legislature  met  at 
Albany  on  January  28,  1800,  an  act  of  its  predecessor 


188  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

on  April  6,  1798,  having  fixed  Albany  as  the  place,  and 
the  last  Tuesday  of  January  as  the  date,  of  regular 
annual  meetings.  Jay  made  a  notable  address,  referring 
with  moving  eloquence  to  the  nation's  loss  in  the  death 
of  Washington,  and  making  many  recommendations  of 
constructive  statesmanship  of  the  highest  utility.  Con- 
spicuous among  these  was  one  which  must  surely  have 
been  inspired,  or  at  least  strengthened,  by  remembrance 
of  Burr's  jobbery  in  the  last  days  of  the  preceding 
Legislature,  but  which  was  certainly  pertinent  even 
then,  and  which  might  well  have  been  urged  upon  every 
Legislature  from  that  time  to  the  present.  That  was, 
the  desirability  of  giving  public  business  precedence 
over  private  matters,  and  of  considering  important  bills 
early  in  the  session  instead  of  leaving  them  to  be  rushed 
through  without  consideration  at  the  close.  "The  small 
proportion,"  he  said,  "which  our  important  public 
statutes  bears  to  the  numerous  private  ones  passed  for 
individual  or  for  local  and  particular  purposes,  has 
become  remarkable.  Might  not  the  claims  of  indi- 
viduals be  for  the  most  part  heard,  examined,  and 
ascertained  in  some  mode  more  easy  to  them  and  less 
expensive  to  the  State,  than  by  the  Legislature;  and 
ought  not  business  of  great  and  general  moment  to  pre- 
cede that  of  less  and  limited  importance?  It  has  not 
infrequently  happened  that  the  earlier  part  of  the 
session  has  been  so  far  consumed  in  debates,  and  in  pre- 
paring and  passing  acts  respecting  these  lesser  matters, 
that  much  interesting  public  business  has  been  either  too 
hastily  dispatched  toward  the  conclusion  of  the  session, 
or  been  entirely  relinquished  and  left  unfinished.  The 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  189 

frequency  of  acts  for  private  incorporations,"  he  con- 
tinued significantly,  "and  the  difficulty  of  afterward 
restraining  or  correcting  the  evils  resulting  to  the  public 
from  unforeseen  defects  in  them,  lead  me  to  advert  to 
the  prudence  of  passing  them  only  under  such  circum- 
stances of  previous  publicity  and  deliberation  as  may  be 
proper  to  guard  against  the  effect  of  cursory  and  inac- 
curate views  and  impressions." 

Renewed  attention  was  called  to  the  desirability  of 
increased  measures  of  military  preparedness,  and 
special  recommendations  were  made  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  common  schools  and  for  the  promotion  of 
higher  education.  The  Common  School  law  of  1795, 
which  was  to  operate  for  five  years,  was  renewed  by  the 
Assembly,  but  unfortunately  the  Senate  refused  to  con- 
cur, and  the  school  system  was  therefore  permitted  to 
lapse  until  1812,  when  a  general  law  was  enacted. 
Union  College,  however,  was  assisted  in  March,  1800, 
with  an  appropriation  of  $10,000  and  a  grant  of  public 
lands.  The  Governor  recommended  discontinuance  of 
the  system  of  "annual  gratuitous  allowances  by  the 
Legislature  to  the  officers  of  the  executive  and  judicial 
departments"  as  calculated  to  impair  the  constitutional 
independence  of  those  branches  of  the  government,  and 
a  bill  making  a  temporary  readjustment  of  judicial 
salaries  was  thereupon  passed.  The  Council  of  Revi- 
sion vetoed  it  because  it  provided  for  a  mere  temporary 
allowance  in  addition  to  the  fixed  salaries  of  the  Chan- 
cellor and  Judges,  but  it  was  repassed  over  the  veto. 

The  Legislature  reduced  the  salary  of  the  Comp- 
troller from  $3,000  to  $2,500,  whereupon  Samuel  Jones 


190  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

declined  reappointment  and  was  succeeded  by  John  V. 
Henry,  a  member  of  the  Assembly  and  an  eminent  law- 
yer. A  strong  effort  was  made  by  the  Democratic  mem- 
bers, under  the  lead  of  Jedediah  Peck,  to  have  the  State 
divided  into  electoral  districts,  from  each  of  which  one 
Presidential  Elector  should  be  chosen.  This  was  a 
renewal  of  the  attempt  that  had  been  made  by  Burr 
in  the  preceding  Legislature  and  defeated.  John  V. 
Henry  voiced  the  Federalist  opposition  to  it  on  con- 
stitutional grounds,  insisting  that  as  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  said  "Each  State  shall  appoint"  the 
Electors,  it  was  necessary  for  the  State  to  act  in  the 
matter  as  a  corporate  whole,  through  the  Legislature, 
and  not  remit  the  matter  to  the  people;  also  that  each 
Elector  must  be  appointed  by  the  whole  State,  and  not 
be  elected  by  a  mere  district  or  part  of  the  State.  The 
proposal  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  47  for  it  to  57 
against  it. 

The  resignation  of  James  Watson  as  United  States 
Senator  was  received,  and  another  great  name  was 
added  to  the  roll  of  New  York's  public  servants  by  the 
election  of  Gouverneur  Morris  to  succeed  him,  a  choice 
of  course  particularly  pleasing  to  Jay.  The  opposing 
candidate  was  Peter  Gansevoort,  of  Albany,  and  the 
voting  was  on  strict  party  lines. 

The  death  of  Washington  moved  the  Legislature  to 
commemorate  the  anniversary  of  his  birth.  The  session 
was  suspended  on  February  21,  and  was  not  resumed 
until  February  24,  while  on  February  22  an  impressive 
public  religious  service  was  held. 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  191 

Finally,  on  April  8,  the  Legislature  adjourned  with- 
out day,  but  with  a  provision  that  its  successor  should 
meet  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  November  following,  in 
special  session,  for  the  choice  of  Presidential  Electors. 

A  month  later  the  spring  elections  had  been  held,  the 
Federalists  were  defeated,  and  it  was  obvious  that  the 
new  Legislature  at  its  meeting  in  November  would 
choose  supporters  of  the  Democracy  as  Electors,  and 
that  this  would  give  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States 
to  that  party.  Hamilton  was  furious  and  resorted  to 
what  we  must  regard  as  a  most  unworthy  counsel  of 
despair.  The  twenty-third  Legislature  had  adjourned 
without  day,  but  it  was  still  legally  in  existence  and 
could  be  reconvened  by  the  Governor.  It  contained  a 
safe  Federalist  majority.  He  urged,  therefore,  that  it 
should  at  once  be  called  together,  as  it  could  be  at  any 
time  before  July  1,  and  should  pass  the  very  proposal 
which  it  and  also  its  Federalist  predecessor  had 
rejected,  for  dividing  the  State  into  electoral  districts 
and  having  the  Presidential  Electors  chosen  from  them 
by  popular  vote.  He  and  his  followers  had  opposed 
this  before,  when  they  felt  sure  of  securing  all  the 
Electors  through  the  Legislature,  and  the  Democracy 
had  favored  it  as  their  only  chance  for  getting  some  of 
the  Electors.  Now  conditions  were  about  to  be 
reversed.  In  consequence,  Hamilton  favored  the  dis- 
tricting plan,  which  would  give  the  Federalists  some  of 
the  Electors,  whom  they  could  not  get  through  the 
Legislature,  and  the  Democracy  would  doubtless  have 


192  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

opposed  it  as  calculated  to  deny  them  the  choice  of  all 
the  Electors  through  the  Legislature  which  they  would 
control. 

Never  was  there  a  more  flagrant  and  cynical  sub- 
version of  pretended  principle  to  the  exigencies  of 
partisan  advantage,  and  it  is  humiliating  to  recall  that  a 
statesman  of  Hamilton's  genius  condescended  to  attempt 
a  trick  which,  as  he  frankly  confessed  to  Jay,  would 
transcend  "the  ordinary  forms  of  delicacy  and 
decorum."  In  brief,  it  would  be  legal,  but  it  would  be 
indecent  Hamilton  was  doubtless  so  possessed  with 
distrust  of  Jefferson  and  loathing  of  Burr,  and  so  con- 
vinced that  their  accession  to  power  would  be  mis- 
chievous if  not  disastrous  to  the  nation,  that  he  reckoned 
even  such  sharp  practice  as  this  permissible. 

But  he  reckoned  without  Jay.  Such  a  performance 
was  impossible  to  that  chivalrous  knight-errant  of 
patriotism,  sans  peur  et  sans  reproche.  He  refused.  It 
has  been  said  that  he  was  insincere,  or  was  governed  by 
some  unworthy  motive;  for  which  aspersion  there  can 
be  no  conceivable  ground.  Jay  had  already  resolved 
to  retire  from  public  life  at  the  end  of  his  term  as 
Governor,  and  therefore  no  political  considerations  had 
weight  with  him.  Not  even  Washington  was  more 
devoted  to  the  welfare  of  the  country.  Not  even  Ham- 
ilton was  a  more  stalwart  Federalist,  or  more  pro- 
foundly disapproved  the  tendencies  of  the  party  of 
Jefferson  and  Burr.  But  Jay  was  endowed  with  a  judi- 
cial temperament  and  above  all  with  a  prescience  which 
Hamilton  with  all  his  surpassing  genius  never 
possessed,  and  with  a  scrupulous  sense  of  honor  sur- 


GOUVERKEUR    MORRIS 

Gouverneur  Morris;  born  in  Morrisania,  Westchester 
county,  January  31,  1752;  lawyer;  delegate  to  New  York 
provincial  congress,  1775;  delegate  to  the  continental  congress, 
to  fill  vacancy  caused  by  the  resignation  of  his  father,  Lewis 
Morris,  1777-80;  assistant  minister  of  finance,  1781-85;  member 
of  the  convention  that  framed  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States,  1787;  minister  to  France,  1792-94;  United  States  senator, 
1800-3;  chairman  Erie  canal  commission,  1810-13;  died  in 
Morrisania,  NT.  Y.,  November  6,  1816. 


HENRY  RUTGERS 

Henry  Rutgers,  jurist;  born  in  New  York  City,  October  7, 
1745;  served  in  the  revolution;  member  of  the  legislature,  1777- 
78,  1784,  1800-1802,  1804-5,  1807-8;  regent,  1802;  presidential 
elector,  1808,  1816,  1820;  president  of  electoral  college,  1816, 
1820;  died  in  New  York  City,  February  17,  1830. 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  193 

passed  by  that  of  no  man  in  American  history.  He 
could  not  do  a  wrong  act  even  in  hope  that  good  might 
come  of  it;  and  he  had  faith  to  believe  that  America 
would  survive  any  temporary  change  of  political  con- 
trol that  might  occur.  So  he  refused  Hamilton's 
desperate  plea,  endorsing  upon  his  letter  the  noble 
words:  "This  is  a  measure  for  party  purposes,  which 
I  think  it  would  not  become  me  to  adopt." 

By  the  side  of  the  theft  of  the  Governorship  in  1792, 
of  which  Clinton  was  the  avid  beneficiary;  by  the  side 
of  the  proposal  of  Hamilton,  of  which  we  have  just 
spoken;  by  the  side  of  the  habitual  practices  of  Burr, 
which  were  countenanced  by  even  the  best  men  of  his 
party;  by  the  side  of  the  personal  pique  and  tergiversa- 
tion of  Chancellor  Livingston  ;  beside  the  unscrupulous 
manipulation  of  the  Council  of  Appointment  some 
years  later,  which  Governor  Tompkins  approved — by 
the  side  of  these  things,  in  splendid  contrast,  this 
momentous  decision  of  Jay's  deserves  everlasting 
remembrance.  He  knew,  as  he  made  it,  what  the  result 
would  be;  and  he  had  the  triumphant  faith  to  believe 
that,  whatever  regrettable  result  might  come  of  it,  the 
ultimate  result  of  a  righteous  deed  could  not  be  other- 
wise than  right. 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  enter  into  the  tortuous  tale 
of  political  intrigue  in  which  both  Hamilton  and  Burr 
were  implicated  during  that  crucial  summer  and  fall 
of  1800,  further,  at  any  rate,  than  it  directly  concerns 
New  York.  Hamilton,  after  his  failure  to  induce  Jay 
to  call  a  special  session  of  the  expiring  Legislature, 
contented  himself  with  publishing,  late  in  October  and 


194  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 


just  before  the  Presidential  Electors  were  to  be  chosen, 
a  most  unjust  and  regrettable  attack  upon  President 
Adams  as  unfitted  by  temperament  and  talents  to  be 
President,  declaring  his  course  during  his  term  to  have 
been  "a  heterogeneous  mass  of  right  and  wrong."  It 
was  at  this  time  practically  certain  that  Adams  would 
not  be  reelected.  Had  it  not  been  certain,  this 
extraordinary  course  of  Hamilton's  would  have  made  it 
so,  as  it  did  add  immeasurably  to  the  demoralization  of 
the  already  moribund  Federalist  party. 

But  if  Hamilton  was  unjust  and  unfaithful  to  Adams, 
far  more  treacherous  was  Burr  to  Jefferson.  As  soon 
as  the  result  of  the  New  York  spring  election  was 
known,  and  it  seemed  certain  that  the  Democracy 
would  win  the  Presidency,  a  Congressional  caucus  of 
that  party  was  held  at  Philadelphia,  at  which  it  was 
unanimously  agreed  that  Jefferson  should  be  President 
and  that  the  Vice-President  should  be  from  New  York, 
presumably  George  Clinton,  Robert  R.  Livingston,  or 
Aaron  Burr.  Albert  Gallatin  was  authorized  to  com- 
municate with  the  New  York  leaders  and  ascertain  their 
views  and  preferences  as  to  the  choice.  He  did  so 
through  his  friend  Commodore  Nicholson,  who  forth- 
with discreetly  but  diligently  canvassed  the  field.  He 
first  considered  Chancellor  Livingston,  and  found  that 
his  physical  infirmity  of  deafness  was  regarded  as  an 
insuperable  barrier  to  his  choice.  A  deaf  Vice- 
President  could  not  preside  over  the  Senate.  Next  he 
conferred  with  George  Clinton,  who  at  first  peremp- 
torily declined  the  nomination  on  the  grounds  of  age 
(he  was  only  sixty-one) ,  failing  health,  and  the  needs  of 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  195 

his  family.  After  some  discussion  and  earnest  urgings 
by  Commodore  Nicholson,  however,  Clinton  consented 
to  be  a  candidate  if  his  candidacy  should  be  essential  to 
a  victory  for  the  Democracy  and  if  it  was  understood 
that  after  election  he  would  be  at  liberty  to  resign  if  his 
health  and  circumstances  made  it  desirable.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  in  this  Clinton  was  quite  sincere; 
though  neither  can  it  be  doubted  that,  had  his  circum- 
stances been  more  favorable,  he  would  have  eagerly 
desired  the  nomination,  not  only  to  gratify  his  own 
ambition  but  also  to  defeat  Burr,  whom  by  this  time  he 
thoroughly  distrusted  and  regarded  as  not  identified 
with  the  best  welfare  of  the  public. 

Commodore  Nicholson  accordingly  decided  to  report 
to  the  Philadelphia  caucus  in  favor  of  Clinton's 
nomination,  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  he 
actually  wrote  a  letter  to  that  effect.  But  to  complete 
his  commission  he  felt  it  incumbent  upon  him  to  call 
on  Burr.  What  passed  between  them  has  never  been 
disclosed,  or  what  other  influences  may  have  been 
brought  to  bear  upon  Nicholson  by  the  friends  of  Burr 
The  result,  however,  is  of  record.  Nicholson,  after 
urging  and  prevailing  upon  Clinton  to  accept  the 
nomination,  recommended  to  the  caucus  the  nomination 
of  Burr,  which  was  accordingly  made.  Clinton  had 
ample  cause  to  resent  this  as  a  slight  and  treachery  to 
him.  But  whatever  he  may  have  felt  he  was  too  dis- 
creet and  dignified  to  betray  his  feelings.  He  gave  to 
the  ticket,  Jefferson  and  Burr,  loyal  and  effective 
support. 


196  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

We  need  not  here  enter  into  the  details  of  the  intrigues 
and  devious  manipulations  through  which  Burr  strove 
to  betray  Jefferson  and  get  himself  elected  to  the 
Presidency.  As  he  and  Jefferson  had  each  received  the 
same  number  of  Electoral  votes,  it  devolved  upon  the 
House  of  Representatives  to  decide  which  should  be 
President  and  which  Vice-President.  That  vote  of  the 
House  was  to  be  by  States,  and  of  the  sixteen  States  the 
delegations  of  eight  were  Democratic,  six  Feder- 
alist, and  two  equally  divided;  and  a  majority,  to  wit, 
nine,  was  necessary  for  a  choice.  Burr  sought  to  get 
the  Federalist  Representatives  of  New  Jersey  to  vote 
for  him.  He  also  got  William  P.  Van  Ness,  of  New 
York,  then  his  closest  friend  and  a  politician  of  great 
shrewdness  and  influence,  to  write  to  Edward  Living- 
ston, a  Representative  from  New  York,  that  it  was  the 
sense  of  thei  Deimocracy  of  this  State  that  after  & 
few  votes  in  the  House  Jefferson  should  be  dropped  and 
Burr  elected  President.  It  is  possible  that  these  schemes 
would  have  been  successful  had  Burr  been  more  open 
and  courageous  in  his  candidacy.  But  he  elected  to 
pretend  aloofness  and  indifference,  and  to  involve  him- 
self in  an  air  of  mystery;  to  practise  the  equivocation 
and  deceit  and  treachery  that  were  indeed  an 
inseparable  part  of  his  perverted  nature ;  with  the  result 
that  he  not  only  failed  to  gain  the  prize  which  he 
desired,  but  also  brought  upon  himself  ruinous 
reproach  and  upon  others  a  reflection  of  the  same 
odium. 

To  complete  this  portion  of  the  narrative  it  may  be 
added  that  after  the  contest  between  Jefferson  and  Burr 


1801]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  197 

was  thrown  into  Congress,  and  the  House  during  dozens 
of  ineffective  ballots  was  the  scene  of  riotous  and  almost 
revolutionary  demonstrations,  Hamilton  rose  again  to 
the  height  of  his  great  statesmanship  and  atoned,  so 
far  as  possible,  for  his  discreditable  proposal  to  Jay  for 
a  special  session  of  the  Legislature.  He  had  sufficient 
influence  in  the  House  of  Representatives  to  throw  the 
balance  of  power  in  favor  of  either  of  the  two  candi- 
dates. They  were  both  his  enemies,  and  he  distrusted 
both  and  considered  both  dangerous  to  the  integrity  of 
the  young  republic.  The  choice  between  them  was  a 
choice  between  two  evils.  If  Jefferson  were  chosen 
President,  there  could  be  nothing  but  antagonism 
between  him  and  Hamilton,  and  Hamilton  would  have 
no  part  in  the  administration.  If  Burr  were  chosen,  on 
the  other  hand,  any  compromise  or  bargain  would  be 
possible,  for  Burr  would  have  been  quite  capable  of 
putting  Hamilton  at  the  head  of  his  cabinet  if  he  had 
conceived  it  to  be  to  his  political  advantage  to  do  so. 
There  is  a  reason  for  suspecting  that  Burr  actually 
sought  a  compact  with  Hamilton,  under  which  Hamil- 
ton would  have  assured  Burr's  election,  Burr  would 
have  made  Hamilton  the  chief  of  his  cabinet,  and  the 
two  would  have  organized  a  new  party  out  of  parts  of 
both  the  Federalists  and  the  Democracy.  To  all  such 
considerations,  however,  Hamilton  was  adamant. 
Recognizing,  despite  his  dislike  and  distrust  of  him, 
Jefferson  to  be  both  intellectually  and  morally  the 
immeasurable  superior  of  Burr,  he  gave  his  influence 
successfully  for  his  election.  Thus  he  saved  the  republic 
from  the  ruin  which  Burr's  election  would  have 


198  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

brought  upon  it;  and  thus  he  caused  an  exacerbation  of 
Burr's  enmity  which  a  little  later  led  to  his  own  death 
at  the  hand  of  that  assassin. 

Meantime,  on  November  4,  1800,  the  Twenty-fourth 
Legislature  met  at  Albany,  pursuant  to  the  action  of  its 
predecessor,  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  Presidential 
Electors.  The  Governor  in  his  opening  address 
referred  briefly  but  most  pointedly  and  judiciously  to 
the  Presidential  contest  and  to  the  intensity  of  political 
feeling.  "It  is  natural,"  he  said,  "that  the  election  of 
a  first  magistrate  for  the  nation  should  divide  even 
patriots  into  parties;  while  not  intemperate,  few  public 
inconveniences  result  from  them.  But  history  informs 
us  that  when  such  parties  being  nearly  balanced 
become  highly  inflamed,  they  often  endanger  not  only 
the  tranquillity  but  also  the  political  existence  of 
republics.  It  is  wise  to  profit  by  the  experience  of 
others." 

Continuing  his  wise  endeavors  at  constructive  legisla- 
tion, Jay  made  a  number  of  important  recommenda- 
tions, which  were  acted  upon  by  the  Legislature. 
Among  them  were  elaborate  recommendations  for 
legislation  concerning  wills,  bequests,  and  the  general 
disposition  of  estates,  resulting  in  the  passage  of  a 
general  act  on  February  20,  1801 ;  for  reform  of  the  act 
relating  to  the  incorporation  of  religious  organizations, 
including  a  suggestion  that  the  salaries  of  ministers  be 
made,  under  the  law  of  contracts,  a  personal  charge 
against  the  members  of  the  church  corporations,  which 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  199 

led  to  an  enactment  on  March  27,  1801,  but  without  that 
salary  contract  provision ;  and  for  radical  reforms  in  the 
tax  system,  which  were  effected  by  an  act  of  April  8, 
1801. 

As  the  chief  author  of  the  State  Constitution,  it  was 
with  the  best  of  grace  and  with  peculiar  authority  that 
Jay  recommended  the  calling  of  a  popular  convention 
for  the  amendment  of  that  instrument;  not,  however, 
generally,  but  "for  the  sole  and  exclusive  purpose  of 
ordaining  what  shall  be  the  number  of  Senators  and 
Representatives  at  future  periods,  and  of  fixing  the 
limits  which  it  shall  at  no  time  hereafter  exceed." 
There  was  obvious  need  of  such  regulation  of  the  size 
of  the  Legislature,  and  an  act  in  accordance  with  Jay's 
recommendation  was  passed  on  April  6,  1801 ;  but  it 
also  empowered  the  convention  which  was  to  be  called 
to  determine  the  true  construction  of  the  article  of  the 
Constitution  relating  to  the  powers  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment,  which  had  been  so  greatly  in  dispute. 
The  convention  could  not  strictly  be  called  or  ordered 
by  the  Legislature,  however,  since  the  Constitution 
itself,  strangely  enough,  contained  no  provision  for  any 
such  action  or  for  its  own  amendment.  The  action  of 
the  Legislature  took,  therefore,  the  technical  form  of  a 
recommendation  to  the  people  of  the  State  that  they 
create  such  a  convention,  to  meet  at  Albany  on  the 
second  Tuesday  of  October  in  the  next  year;  which,  as 
we  shall  hereafter  see,  was  done. 

After  hearing  the  Governor's  address,  the  Legislature 
proceeded  to  the  choice  of  Presidential  Electors.  In 
the  Senate,  Federalists  were  nominated  by  a  vote  of 


200  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

24  to  18.  In  the  Assembly,  of  which  Samuel  Osgood 
had  been  chosen  Speaker,  Democrats  were  nominated 
by  a  vote  of  64  to  39.  On  joint  ballot,  of  course,  the 
latter  were  elected.  Next  arose  the  question  of  electing 
a  new  Council  of  Appointment.  The  existing  Council 
was  Federalist,  but  the  Assembly  was  Democratic  and 
wanted  to  have  a  new  Council  of  that  party.  The  Fed- 
eralists objected  to  an  election  at  that  time,  on  the 
ground  that  the  existing  Council  had  not  yet  served  out 
its  full  year's  term.  Precisely  the  same  issue  had  arisen 
before,  in  1794,  when  the  Federalists  insisted  upon 
turning  out  a  Council  before  its  term  had  expired  and 
electing  a  new  one,  and  the  Democratic  opposition 
objected  to  it;  but  in  1800  each  party  took  exactly  the 
opposite  position  from  that  which  it  had  held  in  1794! 
The  Democracy  had  the  votes  and  exercised  the  power, 
and  elected  a  new  Council,  consisting  of  DeWitt  Clin- 
ton, Ambrose  Spencer,  and  Robert  Roseboom,  Demo- 
crats, and  John  Sanders,  Federalist.  However,  the  old 
Council  insisted  upon  continuing  to  act,  and  actually 
did  so;  on  January  23,  1801,  it  appointed  Solomon  Van 
Rensselaer  to  be  Adjutant-General  in  place  of  Colonel 
Van  Home,  whose  health  forbade  him  longer  to  serve. 
The  resignation  of  John  Lawrence  as  United  States 
Senator  was  received,  and  John  Armstrong  was  elected 
by  an  almost  unanimous  vote  to  succeed  him.  This 
unanimity  was  due,  apparently,  to  three  causes.  One 
was  Armstrong's  relation  through  marriage  with  the 
Livingstons,  which  gave  him  their  support  and  the 
support  of  Democracy  generally.  The  second  was  the 
fact  that  down  to  a  couple  of  years  before  he  had 


1800]  JAY'S  SECOND  TERM  201 

been  a  strong  Federalist,  and  still  commanded  the 
personal  friendship  and  attachment  of  the  members  of 
that  party.  The  third  was  his  supposed  fitness  for  the 
place  as  a  comprehensive  student  of  national  affairs 
and  a  political  writer  of  exceptional  power.  It  must 
be  added,  however,  that  his  participation  in  New  York 
State  politics  was  so  slight  as  to  be  negligible,  and  that 
the  estimate  of  his  abilities  much  exaggerated. 

This  meeting  of  the  Legislature  lasted  only  five  days, 
from  November  4  to  November  8.  The  only  important 
business  transacted  was  the  choice  of  Electors,  the 
election  of  a  Senator,  and  the  election  of  a  new  Council 
of  Appointment — which  did  not  exercise  its  functions, 
in  fact,  for  more  than  three  months,  the  call  for  a 
Constitutional  convention  not  being  issued  until  the 
next  meeting,  in  April.  Brief  as  it  was,  however,  it 
was  marked  with  exceptional  partisan  activity.  The 
Assembly's  reply  to  the  Governor's  address  was  full  of 
factional  spirit  and  indulged  in  some  pretty  direct 
innuendoes  at  the  Governor  himself,  which  Jay 
ignored.  Just  before  adjournment  the  Democratic 
members  held  a  caucus  and  agreed  upon  George 
Clinton  as  the  party  candidate  for  Governor  at  the  next 
spring's  election,  largely  because  of  resentment  at 
Burr's  betrayal  of  him  in  the  Vice-Presidential  cam- 
paign, and  also  because  of  the  rising  influence  of  his 
brilliant  nephew,  DeWitt  Clinton,  who  had  become  a 
member  of  the  State  Senate  and  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment.  A  little  later  Jeremiah  Van  Rensselaer 
was  nominated  for  Lieutenant-Governor. 


202  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1800 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

At  the  same  hour  the  Federalist  members  of  the 
Legislature  also  held  a  caucus,  which  adopted  resolu- 
tions strongly  approving  Jay's  administration  and 
earnestly  urging  him  to  be  a  candidate  for  another  term. 
But  Jay,  who  in  his  note  of  thanks  to  the  Senate  for  its 
response  to  his  address  had  that  very  day  foreshadowed 
his  retirement  from  public  life,  replied  with  a  positive 
declination.  He  deeply  and  gratefully  appreciated 
their  motives  and  their  friendship,  but  he  had  years 
before  resolved  that  at  this  time  in  his  life  he  would 
retire  from  public  employment.  Accordingly  at  a  later 
date  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer  was  nominated  for  Gov- 
ernor and  James  Watson  for  Lieutenant-Governor. 


CHAPTER  X 
THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM 

IT  was  the  irony  of  fate  that  the  close  of  Jay's  admin- 
istration should  be  marked  and  marred  by  an 
acrimonious  controversy  over  the  interpretation  of 
the  Constitution  which  he  himself  had  drafted,  and  by 
the  triumph  of  a  principle  that  was  peculiarly 
distasteful  and  indeed  detestable  to  him.  Jay  was  a 
partisan,  no  doubt,  in  the  same  sense  that  Washington 
was.  He  was  strongly  devoted  to  certain  principles  and 
policies  of  government;  the  more  strongly  because  his 
policies  and  practices  were  invariably  based  upon  prin- 
ciple, instead  of  his  principles  being  determined  by 
considerations  of  policy.  But  he  was  the  last  man  to 
make  any  mere  political  shibboleth  the  test  of  public 
service,  or  to  make  office  the  spoils  of  victory  at  the 
polls.  Yet  before  his  administration  ended  he  was 
compelled  to  witness  the  establishment  of  a  spoils 
system  in  the  government  of  New  York  which  for  many 
years  surpassed  in  sordid  despotism  any  similar  regime 
in  any  other  State  of  the  American  Union,  and  which 
had  its  origin  in  that  very  Council  of  Appointment 
that  he  had  devised  as  a  barrier  against  such  practices. 
Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  several  con- 
troversies which  had  arisen  concerning  the  powers  of 
the  Council.  The  chief  question  at  issue  was  whether 
the  Governor  had  the  sole  privilege  of  nomination  and 

203 


204  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Council  merely  the  power  of  confirmation  or 
rejection,  or  all  members  of  the  Council  had  equal  right 
with  the  Governor  of  nomination.  Unfortunately,  this 
had,  by  all  but  Jay  himself,  been  regarded  not  as  a 
question  of  constitutional  principle  but  as  one  of 
temporary  party  expediency,  each  of  the  two  parties 
taking  each  of  the  two  sides  of  it  in  turn,  for  the  sheer 
sake  of  political  advantage.  At  the  regular  session  of 
the  Twenty-fourth  Legislature,  in  the  early  part  of  1801, 
Jay  deemed  it  desirable,  as  it  certainly  was,  that  the 
question  should  be  authoritatively  and  permanently 
decided.  Accordingly  on  February  26  he  addressed  a 
message  to  the  Assembly — that  body  being  vested  with 
the  power  of  electing  the  Council  of  Appointment,— 
repeating  his  former  recommendation  that  such  a 
decision  be  sought. 

With  admirable  modesty  he  refrained  from  any 
attempt  to  impose  his  own  interpretation  of  the  Consti- 
tution upon  the  Assembly,  despite  his  obvious  authority 
as  the  author  of  that  instrument.  He  observed  that 
defects  and  obscurities  had  been  found  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  New  York,  as  in  the  Constitutions  of  most  other 
States,  and  that  it  was  desirable  that  these  should  be 
corrected.  When  he  became  Governor  it  had  been  his 
official  duty  to  form  as  correct  a  judgment  as  he  could 
concerning  the  interpretation  of  the  article  in  dispute, 
and  after  much  deliberation  he  had  become  fixed  in  the 
opinion  that  it  vested  the  right  of  nomination  exclu- 
sively in  the  Governor.  He  had  found,  on  conferring 
with  his  predecessor  in  the  Governorship,  that  he  also 
had  held  that  view  and  had  always  claimed  that  right 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  205 

and  had  never  yielded  or  conceded  it  to  the  Council. 
Nevertheless,  as  members  of  a  former  Council  had 
adopted  a  different  construction  of  that  article,  and  as 
it  was  evidently  a  question  on  which  upright  and  judi- 
cious men  might  differ,  he  had  in  his  first  address  to  the 
Legislature  suggested  the  advisability  of  its  making  a 
declaratory  act  upon  the  subject.  This  the  Legislature 
had  not  done.  There  had  therefore  been  nothing  for 
him  to  do  but  to  continue  the  course  upon  which  he  had 
deliberately  decided,  and  which  his  predecessor  had 
invariably  pursued. 

This  course  had,  however,  led  to  difficulties.  Two 
days  before,  on  February  24,  the  Council  had  negatived 
his  appointments  of  a  number  of  Sheriffs,  though  it  had 
confirmed  certain  other  appointments.  On  one  nomina- 
tion three  members  of  the  Council  had  refused  to  vote 
at  all,  and  then  one  of  those  members  had  himself,  in 
controversion  of  the  Governor's  right,  made  a 
nomination  for  the  office  under  consideration.  Judging 
it  prudent  to  consider  maturely  what  ought  to  be  his 
conduct  in  such  circumstances,  the  Governor  thereupon 
had  adjourned  the  Council.  (It  may  be  added  that  he 
never  again  called  it  together.)  He  was  not,  he  told  the 
Assembly,  surprised  that  the  Council  should  claim,  as 
indeed  it  had  formerly  done,  concurrent  right  and 
power  of  nomination ;  but  that  a  majority  of  its  mem- 
bers should  refuse  to  vote  at  all  upon  a  nomination  of 
the  Governor,  and  then,  while  that  nomination 
remained  thus  not  disposed  of,  should  nominate  another 
person  for  the  same  office,  appeared  to  him  "not  a  little 
extraordinary."  Many  appointments  exceedingly  inter- 


206  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

esting  to  the  public  needed  soon  to  be  made,  but  while 
the  majority  of  the  Council  persisted  in  the  course 
which  it  had  adopted,  it  would  be  impossible  for  the 
Governor  to  make  them.  He  was  convinced  that  he 
could  not  concede  to  the  members  of  the  Council  the 
powers  which  some  of  them  claimed  without  violating 
his  oath  to  administer  the  government  to  the  best  of  his 
knowledge  in  conformity  with  the  powers  delegated  to 
him  by  the  Constitution.  Therefore  he  submitted  to 
the  Assembly  consideration  of  the  question  whether  it 
had  not  become  indispensable  that  the  merits  of  these 
opposite  and  interfering  claims  to  the  right  of  nomina- 
tion should  be  ascertained  and  decided  without  delay. 

At  the  same  time  Jay  addressed  a  similar  statement 
of  facts  to  the  Chancellor  and  Justices  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  requesting  their  opinions,  which  they  unani- 
mously declined  to  give  on  the  ground  that  such 
expression  of  opinion  was  not  within  the  scope  of  their 
judicial  duties. 

The  Assembly  on  the  following  day  adopted  a 
resolution  declaring  it  to  be  its  sense  that  it  had  no 
authority  to  interpose  between  the  Governor  and  the 
Council  of  Appointment,  or  to  pass  a  determining  act 
concerning  the  powers  of  the  Council.  A  few  days  later 
the  Assembly  refused  to  concur  in  a  resolution  of  the 
Senate  calling  for  the  appointment  of  a  joint  committee 
of  the  two  houses  to  investigate,  consider,  and  report 
upon  the  matter,  "with  their  opinion  of  a  fit  and  proper 
mode  of  determining  the  constitutional  question." 

The  next  step  was  taken  by  the  Council  itself,  or  by 
the  three  members  in  opposition  to  the  Governor.  These 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  207 

were  Robert  Roseboom,  Ambrose  Spencer,  and  DeWitt 
Clinton,  the  last  named  being  the  dominant  member. 
They  addressed  a  communication  to  the  Assembly, 
representing  that  there  were  numerous  appointive 
offices  needing  to  be  filled;  that  the  interests  of  the 
State  would  suffer  if  they  were  not  filled ;  that  the  Gov- 
ernor had  not  called  the  Council  together  for  the  pur- 
pose of  filling  them;  and  that  therefore  they,  the  three 
members  of  the  Council,  felt  it  incumbent  upon  them 
to  explain  the  reasons  for  their  conduct.  There  fol- 
lowed a  long  and  detailed  account  of  the  controversies 
between  these  three  members  and  the  Governor  at  the 
late  meetings  of  the  Council,  in  which  the  attempt  was 
made  to  show,  and  indeed  the  explicit  charge  was  made, 
that  the  Governor  had  been  trying  to  "play  politics"  by 
filling  offices  with  his  own  partisans  regardless  of 
fitness.  This  was  supplemented  with  a  still  longer  and 
more  elaborate  legal  argument  against  the  Governor's 
exclusive  right  of  nomination,  and  urging  that  that 
power  was  "exclusively  entrusted  to  the  Council,"  the 
Governor  having  nothing  to  say  excepting  to  cast  the 
deciding  vote  in  case  of  a  tie  in  the  Council.  It  was 
pointed  out  that  while  the  former  Governor,  Clinton, 
had  always  insisted  upon  his  sole  right  to  make  nomina- 
tions, the  former  Councils  had  never  conceded  to  him 
that  right  or  relinquished  their  claim  to  the  concurrent 
right;  and  that  indeed  in  one  case,  that  of  the  appoint- 
ment of  Justice  Benson,  the  Council  had  successfully 
asserted  that  right,  in  which  Governor  Clinton  had 
perforce  acquiesced.  It  was  a  "fighting  document" 
from  beginning  to  end,  containing  many  acrimonious 


208  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  fi80l 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

aspersions  upon  the  Governor,  and  it  is  impossible  to 
escape  the  belief  that  it  was  intended  by  DeWitt  Clin- 
ton, who  was  doubtless  its  chief  author,  not  so  much  for 
the  Assembly  as  for  the  public  at  large.  It  was,  in  brief, 
a  campaign  document  for  use  in  the  electoral  campaign 
of  that  spring. 

The  Legislature  on  April  6  adopted  what  was 
probably  on  the  whole  the  best  possible  course.  Jay 
had  already  suggested  that  it  should  recommend  to  the 
State  the  holding  of  a  Constitutional  convention  to  deal 
solely  with  the  matter  of  legislative  apportionment.  It 
did  adopt  such  a  recommendatory  resolution,  but  it  also 
included  as  a  subject  upon  which  the  convention  should 
act  the  interpretation  of  the  twenty-third  article  of  the 
Constitution  relating  to  the  powers  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment.  Then  the  Senate  adopted  a  resolution 
declaring  it  to  be  the  sense  of  the  Legislature  that  the 
Council,  as  a  matter  of  expediency,  should  waive  its 
demands  for  concurrent  power  of  nomination,  so  that 
the  business  of  the  State  could  be  resumed  in  an  orderly 
fashion.  This  resolution  the  Assembly  refused  to 
accept,  doubtless  at  the  suggestion  of  DeWitt  Clinton. 
That  aggressive  leader  not  only  opposed  this  resolu- 
tion, but  also  sought  to  have  the  Senate  adopt  in  its  place 
one  drafted  by  himself,  suggesting  the  possible  need  of 
invoking  the  power  of  impeachment  against  the  Gov- 
ernor, and  declaring  that  for  the  Legislature  to  attempt 
to  prejudice  a  case  which  might  thus  come  before  it  in 
its  judicial  capacity  as  a  court  of  impeachment  would 
be  grossly  improper. 


ALBERT  GALLATIN 

Albert  Gallatin,  secretary  of  the  treasury;  born  in  Geneva, 
Switzerland,  January  29,  1761;  emigrated  to  Boston,  Mass., 
1780;  served  in  revolutionary  army;  member  of  Pennsylvania 
constitutional  convention,  1789;  member  of  state  legislature, 
1790-92;  elected  United  States  senator,  but  was  refused  seat 
upon  the  grounds  that  he  had  not  been  long  enough  a  citizen 
of  the  United  States;  congressman,  1795-1801;  appointed 
secretary  of  the  treasury  by  President  Jefferson,  January  26, 
1802;  reappointed  by  President  Madison,  and  served  until 
February  9,  1814,  when  he  was  appointed  a  commissioner  to 
negotiate  the  Treaty  of  Ghent,  which  was  signed  December 
24,  1814;  appointed  United  States  minister  to  France  by  Pres- 
ident Madison  in  1815,  and  served  until  1823;  minister  plen- 
ipotentiary to  Great  Britain  from  May  10,  1826  until  October 
24,  1827;  "died  at  Astoria,  L.  I.,  August  12,  1849. 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  209 

This  astounding  resolution  was  rejected  by  the 
Senate,  whereupon  DeWitt  Clinton  introduced  another, 
calling  upon  the  Governor  to  convene  the  Council  and 
"so  to  accommodate  with  them  respecting  the  right 
of  nomination  as  to  prevent  a  further  interruption  of 
appointments  until  a  constitutional  decision  can  be  had 
on  that  question."  This  also  was  rejected  by  the  Senate. 
Finally,  on  April  8  the  Assembly  adopted  a  long 
resolution,  referring  to  the  Governor's  failure  to  con- 
vene the  Council  and  the  consequent  embarrassment  of 
public  business;  declaring  that  responsibility  for  this 
state  of  affairs  must  rest  upon  either  the  Governor  or 
the  Council,  and  that  the  Assembly  might  have  to  resort 
to  impeachment  proceedings  "against  the  delinquent  or 
delinquents";  resenting  the  passage  and  transmission  to 
the  Assembly  by  the  Senate  of  two  resolutions  "having 
a  tendency  to  produce  an  interference  in  the  said 
controversy"  ;  and  declaring  that  the  Assembly  persisted 
in  its  former  resolution  denying  the  right  of  the  Legis- 
lature to  interpose  between  the  Governor  and  the 
Council  or  to  pass  a  declaratory  act  concerning  the 
powers  of  the  Council. 

That  same  day  the  Legislature  adjourned  and  the 
matter  was  left  for  popular  decision  at  the  polls  in  the 
impending  elections,  both  for  Governor  and  Legisla- 
ture, and  for  members  of  the  Constitutional  conven- 
tion. The  result  was  what  might  have  been  and  indeed 
was  generally  expected.  Jefferson  had  become  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States,  and  his  party,  which  we  may 
now  and  hereafter  call  the  Democratic  party,  was 
almost  everywhere  in  the  ascendant.  New  England 


210  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

indeed  still  remained  largely  Federalist,  but  not  even 
the  large  influx  of  New  England  settlers  could  hold 
New  York  for  that  party.  George  Clinton  was  elected 
Governor  by  24,808  votes  against  20,843  cast  for  the 
"great  patroon,"  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  and  a  strong 
Democratic  majority  to  support  him  was  returned  to 
the  Legislature.  The  Constitutional  convention, 
which  was  to  meet  at  Albany  on  October  13,  and  for 
which  an  election  was  held  on  August  27,  was  also 
chiefly  of  that  complexion.  It  will  be  fitting  at  this 
point  to  review  briefly  the  work  of  that  convention 
before  proceeding  with  the  more  general  narrative  of 
the  State's  history. 

The  two  commanding  figures  in  the  convention  were 
rivals  for  the  leadership  of  the  Democratic  party, 
Aaron  Burr  and  DeWitt  Clinton — bitter  and  unrelent- 
ing personal  foes.  William  P.  Van  Ness,  the  friend 
and  agent  of  Burr,  was  also  a  conspicuous  member;  as 
was  Smith  Thompson,  afterward  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  Daniel  D. 
Tompkins,  afterward  Governor  of  New  York,  made  his 
first  appearance  in  public  life  as  a  delegate  from  New 
York  county  to  this  convention.  The  chief  Federalist 
was  the  veteran  John  V.  Henry,  who  came  from  Albany 
county.  Aaron  Burr  was  unanimously  elected  presi- 
dent of  the  convention,  through  three  motives.  One 
was,  that  he  was  Vice-President  of  the  United  States 
and  therefore  of  higher  official  standing  than  any  other 
member  of  the  convention.  The  second  was,  on  the 
part  of  his  friends,  that  he  should  have  the  honor  and 
influence  of  the  place  in  order  to  promote  his  political 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  211 

interests.  The  third,  on  the  part  of  his  opponents,  was 
that  in  the  chair  he  would  have  less  influence  than  as  a 
leader  on  the  floor.  This  last  consideration  prevailed 
with  DeWitt  Clinton,  who  thereupon  constituted  him- 
self leader  of  the  convention. 

The  first  question  considered  by  the  convention  was 
that  of  legislative  apportionment.  In  this  no  partisan 
issue  was  involved,  and  a  plan  proposed  by  DeWitt 
Clinton  was  adopted  with  little  discussion  and  with 
practically  no  opposition.  Then  arose  the  question  of 
the  powers  of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  and  on  this 
there  was  almost  equal  unanimity  of  opinion.  Seeing 
that  this  was  a  partisan  question,  this  unanimity  might 
at  first  blush  seem  surprising.  But  we  must  remember 
that  each  party  had  at  some  time  committed  itself  to 
each  side  of  it,  and  that  it  was  practically  not  so  much 
a  question  of  principle  as  of  policy  and  temporary 
advantage.  The  Federalists  had  insisted  upon  the 
concurrent  right  of  the  Council  to  nominate  when,  in 
1794,  they  had  forced  the  nomination  of  Egbert  Benson 
as  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  upon  the  reluctant 
Governor  Clinton,  and  the  Democrats  had  done  the 
same  in  their  fight  with  Governor  Jay  in  the  early  part 
of  1801. 

A  resolution  was  introduced  declaring  that  the 
Constitution  was  to  be  so  construed  as  to  give  the 
members  of  the  Council  concurrent  right  and  power  of 
nomination  with  the  Governor.  Against  this  proposi- 
tion there  was  only  one  important  speaker.  That  was 
John  V.  Henry,  of  Albany,  the  Federalist  leader,  who 
made  in  support  of  the  Governor's  exclusive  right  of 


212  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

nomination  the  most  thoughtful  address  in  the  conven- 
tion. There  was  no  man  in  the  convention  whose 
character,  experience,  purity  of  motives,  and  unselfish 
devotion  to  the  public  welfare  more  entitled  him  to  a 
hearing  and  controlling  influence.  But  Mr.  Henry  had 
shortly  before  been  made  a  victim  of  the  spoils  system. 
He  had  been  removed  from  the  office  of  State  Comp- 
troller for  no  other  reason  than  that  he  was  a  Federalist 
and  a  Democrat  wanted  the  place  and  its  salary.  On 
this  account  he  was  regarded  in  the  convention  as  a 
"sorehead"  who  was  animated  by  personal  grievance. 
The  imputation  was  entirely  unfounded  and  unjust,  but 
it  served  to  lessen  the  force  of  his  arguments.  Two 
other  prominent  members  sided  with  Mr.  Henry.  One 
was  Burr's  henchman,  William  P.  Van  Ness,  who 
contented  himself  with  voting  against  the  pending 
resolution,  and  in  so  doing  probably  reflected  Burr's 
wishes.  The  other  was  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  who  not 
only  voted  but  also  spoke  against  it,  a  fact  which  in 
after  years  was  a  source  of  sincere  and  legitimate  pride 
to  him  when  the  pernicious  results  of  that  resolution 
had  become  apparent.  But  Mr.  Tompkins  was  at  that 
time  only  twenty-six  years  old  and  had  never  before 
been  in  public  life,  and  his  words  had  little  weight. 

The  resolution  interpreting  the  Constitution  in  favor 
of  the  Council  of  Appointment  and  against  the  Gov- 
ernor was  favored  by  DeWitt  Clinton,  who  both  spoke 
and  voted  for  it,  and  it  was  adopted  with  only  fourteen 
negative  votes.  Thus  was  effected  perhaps  the  most 
pernicious  act  thus  far,  if  not  for  all  time,  in  the  history 
of  the  State.  It  was  pernicious  in  a  dual  sense.  There 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  213 

can  now  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  a  misinterpretation  of 
the  Constitution.  We  know,  of  course,  that  it  was 
exactly  contrary  to  the  intent  of  the  author  of  the  Con- 
stitution, and  that  it  was  contrary  to  the  understanding 
of  the  foremost  men  among  those  who  adopted  the 
Constitution.  It  was  also  contrary  to  reason,  precedent, 
and  logic.  But  it  was  something  still  worse  and  far 
worse  than  that  The  undisguised  purpose  of  those 
who  proposed  and  adopted  it  was  not  merely  to  give  the 
nominating  power  to  the  Council,  but  also  and 
especially  to  do  so  in  order  to  establish  the  spoils 
system  and  to  give  any  temporary  party  majority  in  the 
Assembly  power  to  create  a  Council  that  would  make  a 
"clean  sweep"  of  the  offices  in  its  favor. 

That  this  was  the  purpose  of  the  politicians  then  in 
power  had  indeed  been  made  plain  by  what  had  been 
happening  during  the  summer,  in  the  interval  between 
the  accession  of  the  new  State  government  and  the 
meeting  of  the  convention.  At  the  beginning  of  July 
George  Clinton  had  become  Governor  once  more. 
There  had  then  been  no  meeting  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment  since  February  24,  when  the  deadlock 
had  occurred  between  Governor  Jay  and  the  three 
Democratic  members.  Entirely  apart  from  the  issues 
involved  in  that  controversy,  there  was  much  need  that 
the  Council  should  resume  its  action.  Accordingly 
Governor  Clinton  took  early  occasion  to  call  it  together, 
and  its  first  meeting  under  his  administration  was  held 
at  Albany  on  August  8,  1801.  There  was  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  the  Governor  himself  intended  or  desired 
the  results  that  followed.  He  had  formerly  been  Gov- 


214  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ernor  for  eighteen  years,  and  had  been  a  decidedly 
self-assertive  and  autocratic  Governor.  Yet  it  does  not 
appear  that  ever  in  so  much  as  a  single  case  had  he 
removed  or  assented  to  the  removal  of  a  faithful  and 
competent  public  officer  on  political  grounds.  Men 
had  been  removed,  but  they  had  been  removed  for 
adequate  cause,  of  which  due  notice  had  been  given 
them,  and  they  had  always  had  opportunity  to  defend 
themselves  and  to  vindicate  themselves,  if  they  could, 
in  hearings  before  the  Council.  In  brief,  an  enlight- 
ened course  had  been  pursued,  in  which  efficient  public 
service  and  not  the  rewarding  of  political  activity  or 
the  building  up  of  a  partisan  "machine"  had  been  the 
aim. 

But  a  new  spirit  had  now  entered  the  political  life  of 
the  State  and  of  the  nation.  We  must  not  denounce 
Jefferson  as  a  spoilsman.  On  the  contrary,  he  more 
than  once  or  twice  expressed  himself  vigorously  and 
effectively  against  the  spoils  system.  Yet  even  he  in 
some  noteworthy  cases  made  changes  in  public  office  for 
political  reasons,  and  thus  set  an  example  which,  while 
legitimate  in  itself,  encouraged  and  incited  others  to  go 
to  far  greater  extremes.  To  say,  as  Jefferson  practically 
did,  that  the  principal  offices  should  be  filled  by  men 
belonging  to  the  majority  party,  and  that  the  minor 
offices  should  be  divided  between  the  two  parties  in 
proportion  to  their  strength  at  the  polls,  sounds 
plausible  and  equitable.  But  its  fatal  evil  was  that  it 
gave  recognition  to  the  claims  of  partisanship  in  the 
public  service  and  made  it  inevitable  that  under  its 
operation  there  would  be  after  every  election  a  number 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  215 

of  changes  for  purely  political  reasons.  Practiced  by 
the  most  conservative  and  moderate  men,  such  a  system 
could  scarcely  avoid  abuse.  In  the  hands  of  politicians 
more  ambitious  than  scrupulous,  it  was  certain  to  lead 
to  scandalous  debauchery  of  the  civil  service. 

The  foremost  protagonist  of  the  new  system  was 
DeWitt  Clinton ;  still  a  young  man — he  was  only  thirty- 
two  when  he  became  the  first  political  "boss"  of  New 
York, — of  transcendent  ability,  of  boundless  ambition, 
of  indomitable  resolution,  of  an  aggressiveness  verging 
upon  sheer  pugnacity;  happily  of  high  integrity;  after 
the  retirement  of  Jay  and  the  assassination  of  Hamilton 
probably  the  ablest  man  in  the  public  life  of  New 
York.  He  had  been  foremost  in  the  controversy  with 
Governor  Jay,  as  the  Democratic  leader  of  the  Senate 
and  the  Council  of  Appointment,  and  with  the  reelec- 
tion of  his  uncle  as  Governor,  with  a  Democratic 
majority  in  each  house  of  the  Legislature,  he  saw  his 
opportunity  of  becoming  the  leader  and  dictator — for 
with  him  leadership  meant  dictatorship— of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  of  the  State.  That  his  ambitions  were  for 
the  sake  of  his  uncle,  or  that  his  uncle  was  privy  to 
them,  or  indeed  approved  them,  does  not  appear.  As 
already  noted,  Governor  Clinton  had  never  made 
removals  from  office  for  political  reasons,  and  there  is 
no  proof  that  he  had  changed  his  mind  or  his  policy. 
But  he  was  beginning  to  suffer  the  infirmities  of 
advancing  years  and  was  unable  to  resist,  even  though 
he  wished  it,  the  impetuous  zeal  of  his  aggressive 
young  kinsman.  In  consequence,  during  this  seventh 
term  of  his  Governorship,  not  George  Clinton  himself 
but  DeWitt  Clinton  was  the  commanding  figure  in  the 


216  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

State.  He  had  only  two  possible  rivals.  One  was 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  and  the  other  was  Aaron  Burr. 
But  the  former  was  temperamentally  and  through  phy- 
sical infirmity  unfitted  for  leadership,  while  the  latter's 
notorious  lack  of  personal  integrity  had  already  largely 
forfeited  public  confidence.  To  make  assurance  of  his 
mastery  over  both  of  them  doubly  sure,  however, 
DeWitt  Clinton  promptly  manoeuvered  an  alliance 
between  the  Clinton  and  Livingston  clans  against  Burr, 
thus  finally  and  utterly  disposing  of  him,  and  then 
secured  for  the  three  Livingstons  distinguished  occupa- 
tions which  would  remove  them  from  active  political 
leadership  in  New  York.  Robert  R.  Livingston 
accepted  from  Jefferson  the  appointment  as  Minister  to 
France  which  he  would  not  accept  from  Washington, 
and  in  that  place  did  his  greatest  work  for  America  and 
for  the  world.  Edward  Livingston  became  United 
States  District  Attorney  and  Mayor  of  New  York  City 
until  the  rascality  of  a  subordinate  brought  him  so  near 
to  ruin  that  he  was  fain  to  remove  to  Louisiana,  where 
he  did  a  work  in  legal  codification  that  entitles  his 
name  to  immortality.  Brockholst  Livingston  became, 
a  few  years  later,  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
New  York.  It  may  be  added,  as  a  reminder  of  the  place 
which  the  Livingston  clan  then  filled  in  public  life,  that 
John  Armstrong,  United  States  Senator,  was  a  brother- 
in-law  of  Robert  R.  and  Edward  Livingston;  Morgan 
Lewis,  who  became  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  New  York,  was  another  brother-in-law ;  and  Thomas 
Tillotson,  Secretary  of  State  of  New  York,  was  a  third 
brother-in-law. 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  217 

The  Council  of  Appointment  at  this  time  consisted, 
as  hitherto  recorded,  of  DeWitt  Clinton,  Ambrose 
Spencer,  Robert  Roseboom,  and  John  Sanders.  The 
last-named  was  a  Federalist,  and  therefore  was  a  negli- 
gible factor.  Mr.  Roseboom  was  the  eldest  of  all,  but 
while  a  man  of  integrity  and  sincere  devotion  to  the 
public  service  he  had  no  family  influence,  was  non- 
aggressive  in  spirit,  and  was  of  mediocre  intellectual 
ability.  He  was  essentially  a  loyal  follower  rather  than 
a  leader.  Mr.  Spencer  was  a  little  older  than  Clinton, 
and  was  a  lawyer  of  distinction,  but  he  lacked  the 
political  ambition,  acumen,  and  aggressiveness  of  his 
younger  colleague,  with  whom,  however,  he  worked  in 
complete  harmony.  Thus  DeWitt  Clinton  became  the 
unquestioned  leader  of  the  Council  of  Appointment, 
and  that,  under  the  interpretation  of  that  body's  con- 
stitutional powers  which  he  insisted  upon  and  which  in 
time  was  formally  made  by  the  Constitutional  conven- 
tion, meant  that  he  was  the  master  and  dispenser  of  the 
political  patronage  of  the  State. 

At  the  first  meeting  of  the  Council  of  Appointment 
in  this  administration,  on  August  8,  the  first  thing  done 
was  the  appointment  of  two  of  the  men  whom  Governor 
Jay  had  refused  to  appoint  and  over  DeWitt  Clinton's 
demand  for  the  appointment  of  whom  the  breach 
between  the  Governor  and  the  Council  had  occurred. 
These  were  John  Blake,  Sheriff  of  Orange  county,  and 
Peter  Vrooman,  Sheriff  of  Schoharie  county.  There 
seems  to  have  been  no  objection  to  these  appointments. 
But  the  next  one,  made  at  the  same  meeting,  did  give 
much  offense.  Sylvanus  Miller,  of  Ulster  county,  was 


218  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

DeWitt  Clinton's  most  obedient  servant.  He  greatly 
desired  to  remove  to  New  York  City  if  he  could  get  a 
lucrative  office  there,  and  Clinton  also  desired  him 
there  because  of  the  greater  political  influence  which 
he  could  exert  in  that  larger  place.  So  Clinton  had  the 
Council  appoint  him  Surrogate  of  New  York  county. 
Now,  Mr.  Miller  was  well  fitted  for  the  place  by  ability 
and  character,  and  his  personal  and  social  qualities  were 
such  that  he  soon  became  a  prime  favorite  in  New  York, 
so  that  the  city  was  glad  to  have  him  serve  as  Surrogate 
for  many  years.  But  there  was  much  resentment  at  first 
at  the  appointment  of  a  "rank  outsider" — what  in  after 
years  was  called  a  "carpetbagger" — to  an  office  which 
many  residents  of  the  city  were  quite  competent  to  fill. 
In  this  case  no  harm  was  done,  but  an  example  was  set 
which  in  later  years  proved  mischievous. 

There  was  still  further  criticism  of  the  action  of  the 
Council  at  this  time  in  removing  two  eminently  capable 
and  highly  honored  men  from  office  to  make  places  on 
purely  political  grounds  for  two  less  competent  men. 
Daniel  Hale  was  removed  from  the  office  of  Secretary 
of  State,  and  his  place  was  filled  by  Thomas  Tillotson, 
whose  claim  to  it  lay  entirely  in  the  fact  that  he  was  a 
brother-in-law  of  Robert  R.  Livingston.  John  V. 
Henry,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  generally  esteemed 
men  in  public  life  in  the  State,  was  removed  from  the 
Comptrollership  to  make  room  for  Elisha  Jenkins,  an 
entirely  respectable  but  far  less  competent  man,  who 
had,  however,  the  advantage  of  being  the  very  obedient 
and  politically  useful  servant  of  Mr.  Spencer.  Nor 
could  it  be  alleged  that  the  Council  was  making  such 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  219 

changes  in  only  the  chief  offices  whose  occupants,  it 
might  be  argued,  should  be  in  political  accord  with  the 
head  of  the  government.  The  same  process  was 
extended  to  a  number  of  minor  places,  such  as  Master 
in  Chancery  and  County  Judge,  in  which  the  political 
predilections  of  the  incumbents  could  be  of  not  the 
slightest  consequence.  Such  applications  of  the  spoils 
system  were  revolting  to  Governor  Clinton,  who  pro- 
tested against  the  appointments,  insisted  upon  his 
protest  being  entered  upon  the  minutes  of  the  Council, 
and  in  at  least  one  case  refused  to  sign  the  minutes 
because  they  did  not  sufficiently  set  forth  his  opposition 
to  some  changes  in  office. 

Worse  followed.  At  the  next  meeting  of  the  Council, 
three  days  later,  the  "dean  sweep"  was  continued. 
Cadwallader  D.  Golden  was  dismissed  from  the  office 
of  District  Attorney  to  make  room  for  Richard  Riker,  a 
henchman  of  Clinton's  and  his  second  in  the  Swartwout 
duel;  and  Richard  Harrison  was  similarly  dismissed 
from  the  Recordership  of  New  York  in  favor  of  John 
B.  Prevost;  in  both  cases  the  changes  being  made  for 
purely  partisan  reasons,  and  the  new  men  being 
obviously  less  fit  than  their  distinguished  predecessors. 
Robert  Benson,  Clerk  of  the  City  of  New  York,  was 
sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  Teunis  Wortman,  a  man  of 
ability  but  of  doubtful  character,  and  William  Coleman 
was  removed  as  Clerk  of  the  Circuit  Court  to  make  a 
place  for  John  McKisson,  a  friend  of  Mr.  Spencer's— 
whereupon,  it  is  of  interest  to  recall,  Alexander  Hamil- 
ton made  Mr.  Coleman  editor  of  the  New  York 
Evening  Post,  which  he  at  that  time  founded.  All  over 


220  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  State  the  "clean  sweep"  extended.  County  Clerks, 
Sheriffs,  and  other  officers  were  turned  out  solely 
because  they  were  Federalists  in  favor  of  Democrats 
and  personal  friends  and  relatives  of  the  members  of  the 
Council  of  Appointment.  There  is  no  exaggeration  in 
the  strenuous  declaration  of  Henry  Adams  in  his  "His- 
tory of  the  United  States,"  that  DeWitt  Clinton  and 
Ambrose  Spencer  "swept  the  Federalists  out  of  every 
office  even  down  to  that  of  auctioneer,  and  without 
regard  to  appearances,  even  against  the  protests  of  the 
Governor,  installed  their  own  friends  and  family  con- 
nections in  power.  .  .  .  DeWitt  Clinton  was  hardly 
less  responsible  than  Burr  himself  for  lowering  the 
standard  of  New  York  politics,  and  indirectly  that  of 
the  nation." 

It  would  be  unjust,  however,  to  let  this  entirely  cor- 
rect estimate  pass  without  averting  the  possibility  of 
misinterpretation.  It  would  be  monstrous  to  write 
''arcades  ambo"  against  the  names  of  DeWitt  Clinton 
and  Aaron  Burr.  The  characters  and  motives  of  the 
two  were  as  far  apart  as  the  poles.  Both  were  politically 
and  personally  ambitious.  But  the  one  was  politically 
and  personally  honest,  and  the  other  was  politically  and 
personally  dishonest.  Greater  difference  than  that  could 
not  exist.  Clinton  exercised  far  greater  and  more 
prolonged  influence  in  New  York  politics  than  Burr, 
and  was  responsible  for  a  far  more  extensive  application 
of  the  spoils  system.  Still,  we  must  remember  that  there 
is,  after  all,  a  radical  distinction  between  spoils  and 
corruption,  and  that  distinction  is  the  measure  of  the 
contrast  between  the  two  men.  DeWitt  Clinton  aimed 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  221 

to  fill  all  the  offices  with  his  political  friends,  but  he 
wanted  them  filled  honestly  and  efficiently.  Burr  cared 
less  about  the  political  complexion  of  office-holders 
than  about  their  subserviency  to  his  sordid  and  corrupt 
schemes.  Democrat  though  he  professed  to  be,  he 
always  preferred  a  dishonest  Federalist  to  an  honest 
Democrat.  Clinton  was  even  more  than  Burr  respon- 
sible for  the  introduction  of  the  system  of  partisan 
spoils;  but  Burr  was  supremely  responsible  for  the 
bipartisan  system  of  political  knavery,  such  as  reached 
its  fruition  two  generations  later  in  the  Tweed  Ring. 

We  can  almost  forgive  Clinton  for  his  proscription 
of  Federalist  office-holders  because  of  the  deathblow 
which  he  thus  gave  to  Burr.  He  and  Spencer  did  not 
withhold  their  hands  in  that  epochal  summer  of  1801 
until  every  Federalist  had  been  turned  out  of  office  with 
the  solitary  exception  of  Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman,  the 
Attorney-General  of  the  State,  and  he  was  permitted  to 
remain  a  little  longer  not  because  of  his  eminent  virtues 
and  talents  but  because  Spencer  wanted  the  place  for 
himself  but  was  not  quite  ready  to  take  it.  On  the  other 
hand,  of  the  hundreds  of  new  men  appointed  to  office 
there  was  not  one  who  was  known  to  be  a  partisan  or  a 
friend  of  Burr's.  Some  men  of  high  character  and 
approved  ability  were  passed  by  for  men  of  less 
competence,  simply  because  they  were  or  were  suspected 
to  be  friendly  to  the  Vice-President.  "No  man,"  wrote 
Burr's  henchman,  Van  Ness,  "however  virtuous,  how- 
ever unspotted  his  life  or  his  fame,  could  be  advanced 
to  the  most  unimportant  appointment  unless  he  would 
abandon  all  intercourse  with  Mr.  Burr,  vow  opposition 


222  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

to  his  elevation,  and  pledge  his  personal  services  to 
traduce  his  character."  This  was  no  doubt  an  exagger- 
ation, but  at  least  it  was  required  of  all  appointees  that 
they  should  be  passively  if  not  actively  opposed  to  Burr. 

Nor  was  DeWitt  Clinton  content  with  excluding 
Burr's  friends  from  new  appointments  to  office.  He 
struck  direct  blows  at  Burr  in  the  places  which  he 
already  held.  Hardest  of  all  was  the  compelling  of 
Burr  and  his  friend  John  Swartwout  to  resign  from  the 
directorate  of  that  Manhattan  Bank  which  Burr  had 
corruptly  organized  under  the  guise  of  a  water  supply 
for  New  York.  That  was  a  body  blow  at  Burr  in  his 
chief  stronghold  of  political  and  pecuniary  power,  and 
from  it  he  never  recovered.  It  exasperated  him  so  as  to 
provoke  him  to  the  madness  which  culminated  in  his 
assassination  of  Hamilton  and  thus  ended  his  political 
career  in  New  York.  Finding  all  local  appointments 
thus  barred  against  his  friends,  Burr  turned  to  the  man 
against  whom  he  had  treacherously  intrigued,  and 
besought  the  President  to  name  United  States  officers 
in  New  York  of  his  selection,  to-wit,  a  Marshal, 
Collector,  Supervisor,  and  Naval  Officer.  Jefferson 
complied  so  far  as  to  appoint  John  Swartwout  to  be 
Marshal.  Then  Clinton  intervened,  Jefferson  sum- 
marily rejected  all  the  rest  of  Burr's  candidates,  and 
thereupon  Burr  began  his  open  hostility  to  Jefferson. 

At  this  time,  too,  there  arose  a  spirit  of  violence  in 
public  controversy  which  has  probably  never  been  sur- 
passed anywhere  or  at  any  time.  One  of  the  earliest 
examples  was  given  by  Ambrose  Spencer  in  his  reply 
to  the  protest  of  Ebenezer  Foote,  a  former  Senator  and 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  223 

a  man  of  high  character  and  standing,  against  his  sum- 
mary removal  from  the  Clerkship  of  Delaware  county. 
"It  was,"  said  Mr.  Spencer,  "an  act  of  justice  to  the 
public,  inasmuch  as  in  removing  you  the  veriest  hypo- 
crite and  most  malignant  villain  in  the  State  was 
deprived  of  the  power  of  perpetrating  mischief."  This, 
however,  was  a  mild  beginning.  A  little  later,  in  1802 
and  1803,  came  the  famous  controversy  between  DeWitt 
Clinton  through  his  cousin,  James  Cheetham,  and 
Aaron  Burr  through  his  fidus  Achates,  William  P. 
Van  Ness.  Clinton  was  the  owner  of  a  newspaper,  the 
American  Citizen  and  Watchtoewer>  of  which  Cheet- 
ham, a  naturalized  Englishman,  was  editor.  In  that 
paper,  and  in  volumes  entitled  "A  Narrative,"  "A  View 
of  the  Political  Conduct  of  Aaron  Burr,"  and  "Letters 
on  the  Subject  of  Burr's  Defection,"  he  persistently 
arraigned,  attacked,  and  excoriated  Burr  with  a  copious 
citation  of  facts  and  dates,  persons  and  places,  and 
illimitable  bitterness  of  sarcasm  and  denunciation. 
Cheetham  was  a  master  of  that  sort  of  political  contro- 
versy and  was  doubtless  the  actual  writer,  but  the 
inspiration  and  the  animus  were  of  course  DeWitt 
Clinton's.  "All  the  world,"  says  Henry  Adams,  "knew 
that  not  Cheetham,  but  DeWitt  Clinton,  thus  dragged 
the  Vice-President  from  his  chair";  though  it  is  not  so 
certain  that  entire  justice  is  done  in  what  follows,  that 
"Not  Burr's  vices  but  his  influence  made  his  crimes 
heinous."  Such  a  judgment  implies  a  moral  insensi- 
bility which  we  should  regret  to  impute  to  Clinton  and 
his  associates,  even  amid  their  utmost  frenzy  of  partisan 
animosity. 


224  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  replies  of  Van  Ness,  in  defense  of  Burr,  were 
anonymous.  Everybody  knew  the  authorship  of 
Cheetham's  writings,  but  not  until  years  afterward  did 
it  become  known  that  the  letters  of  "Aristides"  in  the 
public  press  were  written  by  William  P.  Van  Ness.  It 
must  be  confessed  that  in  literary  style  Van  Ness  was 
more  than  a  match  for  Cheetham.  In  fact,  the  world's 
literature  of  acrimonious  political  controversy  contains 
few  more  brilliant  productions  than  some  of  the  "Aris- 
tides" letters.  In  convincing  power,  however,  Van 
Ness  fell  far  short  of  Cheetham,  because  instead  of 
presenting  facts  he  simply  indulged  in  epithets.  That, 
it  is  true,  was  not  his  fault  so  much  as  his  misfortune. 
He  had  the  wrong  side  of  the  case.  The  facts  were  on 
the  other  side.  He  had  therefore  to  follow  the  rule, 
"When  you  have  no  case,  abuse  the  opposing  attorney!" 
In  doing  that  he  ran  the  whole  gamut  of  vilification 
until,  like  Vivien,  he  left 

"Not  even  Lancelot  brave,  nor  Galahad  clean." 

Chancellor  Livingston,  said  "Aristides,"  was  "a 
capricious,  visionary  theorist"  whose  "frivolous  mind 
revolted"  at  all  "important  and  laborious  pursuits" — a 
strangely  inept  characterization  of  a  man  who  did  so 
much  at  the  very  zenith  of  his  career  in  such  "important 
and  laborious  pursuits"  as  the  promotion  of  steam  navi- 
gation and  the  fertilization  of  agricultural  lands. 
Tillotson,  Livingston's  brother-in-law,  was  "a  con- 
temptible, shuffling  apothecary,  without  ingenuity,  or 
spirit  to  pursue  any  systematic  plan  of  iniquity."  Riker, 
the  close  friend  of  DeWitt  Clinton,  was  "an  imbecile 


EDWARD  LIVINGSTON 

Edward  Livingston;  born  Livingston  Manor,  NT.  Y.,  May  26, 
1764;  lawyer;  member  of  congress,  1795-1801  and  1823-29; 
United  States  district  attorney,  1801-3;  mayor  of  New  York 
City,  1801-3;  removed  to  Louisiana,  1804;  served  in  the  battle 
of  New  Orleans  under  General  Jackson ;  member  Louisiana 
state  legislature,  1820;  elected  to  congress  and  to  the  United 
States  senate,  1829-31;  resigned  May  24,  1831  to  become 
secretary  of  state;  minister  plenipotentiary  to  France,  1833-35; 
died  'n  Barrytown,  Dutchess  county,  N.  Y.,  May  23.  1836. 


JOHN  LANSING,  JR. 

John  Lansing,  Jr.,  chancellor;  born  in  Albany,  N.  Y., 
January  30,  1754;  lawyer;  secretary  to  Gen.  Philip  Schuyler, 
1776-77;  delegate  to  continental  congress,  1784-85;  delegate 
to  state  convention  to  ratify  federal  constitution,  1788;  member 
of  assembly,  1780-89;  justice  supreme  court  of  New  York, 
1790-98;  chief  justice,  1798-1801;  chancellor,  1801-14;  unan- 
imously nominated  by  Anti-Federalists  for  governor  of  New 
York  in  1804  but  declined;  mysteriously  disappeared  after 
leaving  his  hotel  to  post  a  letter  at  one  of  the  docks  of  New 
York  City,  December  12,  1829. 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  225 

and  obsequious  pettifogger,  a  vain  and  contemptible 
little  pest."  McKisson,  the  friend  of  Spencer,  was  "an 
execrable  compound  of  every  species  of  vice." 
Ambrose  Spencer  himself  was  "a  man  as  notoriously 
infamous  as  the  legitimate  offspring  of  treachery  and 
fraud  can  possibly  be."  Samuel  Osgood,  formerly 
United  States  Postmaster-General,  was  "a  born  hypo- 
crite," who  "propagated  falsehood  for  the  purpose  of 
slander  and  imposition."  Governor  George  Clinton 
himself  had  "dwindled  into  the  mere  instrument  of  an 
ambitious  relative." 

These,  however,  were  mere  "ballons  d'essai."  It  was 
when  he  got  at  work  upon  DeWitt  Clinton  himself  that 
"Aristides"  Van  Ness  rose  to  the  full  height — or 
descended  to  the  full  depth — of  vituperative  maledic- 
tion. Clinton  was  "formed  for  mischief,  inflated  with 
vanity,  cruel  by  nature."  He  was  "an  object  of  derision 
and  disgust."  He  was  "an  adept  in  moral  turpitude, 
skilled  in  all  the  combinations  of  treachery  and  fraud, 
with  a  mind  matured  by  the  practice  of  iniquity,  and 
unalloyed  with  any  principle  of  virtue."  With  auda- 
cious irony  "Aristides"  declared  that  if  it  were  not 
"disgraceful  to  political  controversy"  he  would 
"develop  the  dark  and  gloomy  disorders  of  his  malig- 
nant bosom,  and  trace  each  convulsive  vibration  of  his 
wicked  heart";  but,  refraining  for  very  shame  from 
saying  what  he  might  have  said,  he  contented  himself 
with  pillorying  Clinton  as  one  of  those  "who,  though 
destitute  of  sound  understandings,  are  still  rendered 
dangerous  to  society  by  the  intrinsic  baseness  of  char- 
acter that  engenders  hatred  to  everything  good  and 


226  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

valuable  in  the  world;  who  with  barbarous  malignity 
view  the  prevalence  of  moral  principles  and  the 
extension  of  benevolent  designs;  who,  foes  to  virtue, 
seek  the  subversion  of  every  valuable  institution,  and 
meditate  the  introduction  of  wild  and  furious  disorders 
among  the  supporters  of  public  virtue."  He  had  culti- 
vated "intimacy  with  men  who  have  long  since 
disowned  all  regard  to  decency  and  have  become  the 
daring  advocates  of  every  species  of  atrocity."  He  had 
formed  an  "indissoluble  connection  with  those  who  by 
their  lives  have  become  finished  examples  of  profligacy 
and  corruption,"  and  who  "have  sworn  enmity,  severe 
and  eternal,  to  the  altar  of  our  religion  and  the  pros- 
perity of  our  government."  Of  course  these  things 
"must  infallibly  exclude  him  from  the  confidence  of 
reputable  men."  Finally,  Clinton  was — the  reference 
was,  of  course,  to  his  intimacy  with  Cheetham — "the 
constant  associate  of  a  man  whose  name  has  become 
synonymous  with  vice,  a  dissolute  and  fearless  assassin 
of  private  character,  of  domestic  comfort,  and  of  social 
happiness;  the  bosom  friend  and  supporter  of  the 
profligate  and  abandoned  libertine,  who,  from  the  vul- 
gar debauches  of  night,  hastens  again  to  the  invasion  of 
private  property;  who,  through  the  robbery  of  the 
public  revenue  and  the  violation  of  private  seals,  hurries 
down  the  precipice  of  deep  and  desperate  villainy." 

If  now  we  smile  weariedly  at  these  extravagances, 
and  wonder  that  they  did  not  instantly  condemn  their 
author  to  fatal  ridicule,  we  must  remember — what  is 
indeed  suggested  by  Van  Ness's  pen  name,  "Aristides" 
— that  the  United  States,  and  especially  New  York,  had 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  227 

then  fallen  under  the  spell  of  a  certain  neo-classicism. 
The  towns  of  the  State  were  being  named  Rome  and 
Athens  and  Syracuse  and  Homer  and  Ovid,  and  every 
public  building,  if  not  indeed  every  private  house  above 
the  rank  of  the  merest  cottage,  must  be  modeled  after  a 
Greek  or  Roman  temple.  It  was  only  natural,  there- 
fore, for  Van  Ness  to  take  for  his  model  Cicero's 
orations  against  Catiline  and  Verres,  and  it  was  only 
natural  for  the  public  generally  to  take  his  extravagant 
diatribes  in  all  seriousness. 

While  in  fluency  of  railing  and  copiousness  of  vilifi- 
cation Van  Ness  surpassed  Cheetham,  the  moral  victory 
was  never  in  doubt  on  Clinton's  side.  Burr's  private 
and  public  turpitude  was  by  this  time  too  well  known 
to  permit  the  rehabilitation  of  his  character  by  mere 
unsupported  lampooning  of  other  men.  But  high  words 
led  to  high  passions,  and  these  to  personal  conflicts. 
Those  were  unhappily  still  the  days  of  the  "field  of 
honor."  When  Swartwout  declared  that  DeWitt 
Clinton's  opposition  to  Burr  was  based  upon  unworthy 
and  selfish  motives,  Clinton  replied  that  Swartwout  was 
"a  liar,  a  scoundrel,  and  a  villain."  Swartwout 
demanded  a  retraction,  which  Clinton  refused,  and  a 
duel  followed  on  the  notorious  duelling  ground  at  Wee- 
hawken,  New  Jersey.  Three  shots  were  exchanged 
without  effect;  Clinton's  fourth  and  fifth  wounded 
Swartwout  in  the  leg;  Swartwout  continued  to  demand 
a  retraction,  but  Clinton  declined  to  give  it  or  to  fight 
further,  and  left  the  field  expressing  a  wish  that  he 
could  have  Swartwout's  principal  there — meaning,  of 
course,  Burr.  Clinton  afterward  said  that  it  was  a  silly 


228  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1801 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

affair,  that  he  ought  to  have  declined  Swartwout's  chal- 
lenge and  himself  have  challenged  Burr.  Another  duel 
followed  between  Clinton's  second,  Riker,  and  Swart- 
wout's younger  brother,  Robert  Swartwout,  in  which 
the  former  was  badly  wounded.  A  third  resulted 
fatally.  Coleman,  in  the  Evening  Post,  printed  a  bitter 
quatrain : 

"Lie  on,  Duane,  lie  on  for  pay, 

And  Cheetham,  lie  thou  too; 
More  against  Truth  you  cannot  say 

Than  Truth  can  say  'gainst  you." 

Duane,  editor  of  the  notorious  Aurora,  the  savage 
lampooner  and  vilifier  of  Washington,  appears  to  have 
paid  no  attention  to  it,  but  Cheetham  took  it  up  and  a 
challenge  followed.  Before  the  meeting,  however, 
Cheetham  weakened  and  compromised  the  matter. 
Thereupon  Thompson,  the  Harbor  Master  of  New 
York,  a  partisan  of  Clinton's,  took  up  the  quarrel. 
Coleman  challenged  him,  and  they  met  at  the  close  of  a 
winter  day  at  what  is  now  the  foot  of  West  Twenty-first 
Street,  New  York.  After  two  ineffective  shots  they 
came  closer  together  in  the  growing  darkness,  and  at 
the  next  shot  Thompson  fell  mortally  wounded. 

To  complete  the  record  of  the  eventful  year  1801  it 
remains  to  be  recalled  that  in  the  closing  hours  of  his 
administration  President  Adams  appointed  Egbert 
Benson  to  be  a  Circuit  Judge  of  the  United  States, 
whereupon  the  latter  of  course  resigned  his  place  on  the 
Supreme  bench  of  New  York.  Then  Robert  R.  Liv- 
ingston resigned  the  Chancellorship,  because  of  advanc- 
ing age,  and  John  Lansing,  Jr.,  Chief-Justice  of  the 


1801]  THE  SPOILS  SYSTEM  229 

Supreme  Court,  was  appointed  to  succeed  him.  These 
changes  made  two  vacancies  in  the  Supreme  Court, 
beside  which  there  was  felt  to  be  need  of  another  Jus- 
tice. No  appointments  were  made  for  several  months, 
and  the  Federalists  charged  that  DeWitt  Clinton  and 
Ambrose  Spencer  were  planning  to  have  themselves 
appointed  to  the  places.  This  was  certainly  untrue 
concerning  Clinton,  though  it  is  probable  that  Spencer 
had  ambition  to  ascend  the  bench,  as  indeed  he  after- 
ward did.  But  before  the  end  of  the  year  Morgan 
Lewis  was  appointed  Chief-Justice,  and  Brockholst 
Livingston  and  Smith  Thompson  were  made  Associate- 
Justices — all  admirable  men,  and  all  members  of  the 
Livingston  clan. 


CHAPTER  XI 
THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY 

GEORGE  CLINTON  was  Governor  again, 
DeWitt  Clinton  was  the  political  dictator  of  the 
State,  and  the  Clinton-Livingston  alliance  was 
all-powerful.  For  a  time,  as  we  have  seen,  the  personal 
conflict  between  DeWitt  Clinton  and  Burr  dominated 
attention.  But  it  was  destined,  with  all  other  State 
issues,  to  yield  place  to  a  greater  strife,  of  national  scope, 
involving  the  man  who  was,  far  more  than  the  younger 
Clinton,  the  antagonist  of  Burr  and  the  obstacle  in  the 
way  of  his  dark  and  devious  machinations.  Hamilton 
had  of  course  retired  from  public  life  at  Washington 
with  the  accession  of  Jefferson,  and  had  no  thought  of 
seeking  State  office  in  New  York.  But  he  was  still  the 
dominant  figure  in  that  remnant  of  the  Federalist  party 
which,  however  impotent  in  national  politics,  was  still 
strong  in  several  of  the  States,  and  which  was  capable 
of  exercising  much  influence  with  a  balance  of  power 
between  the  factions  into  which  the  Democratic  party 
was  divided.  From  the  moment  when  the  rising  power 
of  DeWitt  Clinton  doomed  Burr  to  defeat  in  New 
York,  there  began  a  train  of  incidents  that  led  straight 
to  the  greatest  tragedy  thus  far  in  American  history. 

At  first  all  seemed  serene.  The  Twenty-fifth  Legisla- 
ture met  at  Albany  on  January  26,  1802,  and  listened  to 
Governor  Clinton's  address,  perhaps  the  most  states- 

230 


1802]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  231 

manlike  that  he  had  ever  delivered.  It  was  a  thoughtful 
presentation  and  discussion  of  the  chief  interests  of  the 
State,  with  various  wise  recommendations  and  without 
a  trace  of  partisanship.  There  was  in  it  no  reflection 
of  the  storm  which  was  raging  in  the  politics  of  the 
State ;  no  hint  of  the  greater  storm  which  was  inevitably 
gathering.  Of  like  character  were  the  numerous  com- 
munications which  the  Governor  addressed  to  the 
Legislature  during  the  session.  Not  one  was  contro- 
versial. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Legislature  likewise  were 
devoid  of  partisan  contention.  Thomas  Storm,  a  New 
York  City  Democrat,  was  chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assem- 
bly, and  one  of  the  first  acts  of  that  body  was  to  elect  a 
new  Council  of  Appointment  in  place  of  that  which 
under  DeWitt  Clinton's  lead  had  waged  so  strenuous 
a  campaign  for  spoils.  Four  entirely  new  men  were 
chosen  :  Benjamin  Hunting  from  the  Southern  district, 
James  W.  Wilkin  from  the  Middle,  Edward  Savage 
from  the  Eastern,  and  Lemuel  Chipman  from  the  West- 
ern. It  was  a  Democratic  body,  and  it  appointed  none 
but  Democrats  to  office,  though  the  "clean  sweep"  of 
its  predecessor  had  been  so  thorough  that  there  were 
few  remaining  Federalists  to  be  replaced.  The  most 
conspicuous  change  in  office  was  the  practically 
enforced  resignation  of  Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman,  Fed- 
eralist, as  Attorney-General,  and  the  appointment  of 
Ambrose  Spencer  in  his  place.  This  change,  as  hitherto 
intimated,  had  long  been  in  contemplation.  But  Mr. 
Spencer  had  been  a  member  of  the  former  Council  of 
Appointment,  and  did  not  deem  it  fitting  that  he  should 


232  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1802 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

seek  or  accept  such  elevation  at  the  hands  of  a  body  of 
which  he  was  himself  a  member,  especially  since  there 
had  recently  been  some  discussion  of  a  proposed— 
though  never  adopted — rule  prohibiting  appointment 
by  the  Council  of  one  of  its  own  members  to  office. 
Accordingly  there  had  been  an  understanding  that  Mr. 
Hoffman  should  be  permitted  to  retain  his  office  until 
a  new  Council  should  be  chosen  of  which  Mr.  Spencer 
would  not  be  a  member;  when  Mr.  Hoffman  would 
"resign'1  and  Mr.  Spencer  would  be  appointed  in  his 
place.  On  the  same  day  when  this  appointment  was 
made,  William  Stewart,  a  brother-in-law  of  the  Gov- 
ernor, was  restored  to  the  office  of  District  Attorney  for 
Tioga,  Ontario,  and  other  counties,  from  which  he  had 
been  removed  by  the  Federalist  Council  during  Jay's 
administration. 

The  extraordinary  habit  which  United  States  Sen- 
ators from  New  York  seemed  to  have,  of  resigning  their 
seats,  was  continued  in  February,  1802,  when  the  resig- 
nation of  John  Armstrong  was  reported  to  the  Legisla- 
ture by  Governor  Clinton.  Mr.  Armstrong  had  for- 
merly been  a  Federalist,  but  had  left  that  party  with 
the  Livingstons,  to  whom  he  was  related.  In  his  place 
the  Legislature  elected  DeWitt  Clinton,  who  had  only 
just  reached  the  age  required  by  the  Constitution  for  a 
Senator  of  the  United  States.  This  added  fuel  to  the 
fire  o'f  animosity  between  Clinton  and  Burr,  the  latter 
accusing  the  former  of  having  intrigued  against  Arm- 
strong to  compel  his  resignation,  and  of  having  secured 
the  appointment  of  Dr.  Tillotson,  a  member  of  the 
Livingston  family,  as  Secretary  of  State,  on  the  condi- 


1802-3]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  233 

tion  that  Armstrong  would  resign.  For  these  charges 
there  was,  of  course,  not  the  slightest  ground.  It  was 
inconceivable  that  Armstrong  would  lend  himself  or 
submit  himself  to  any  such  scheme,  while  of  course  it 
was  the  most  natural  thing  in  the  world  that,  if  Arm- 
strong resigned  for  any  cause,  DeWitt  Clinton  should 
be  chosen  to  succeed  him. 

The  other  transactions  of  the  Legislature  were  chiefly 
of  a  routine  and  non-contentious  character,  well  calcu- 
lated to  promote  the  general  welfare  of  the  rapidly 
growing  commonwealth,  and  the  session  was  adjourned 
without  day  on  April  2.  The  spring  elections  followed, 
in  which  every  Senator  chosen  was  a  Democrat  and  a 
large  majority  of  the  Assemblymen  were  of  the  same 
party.  There  followed  the  Clinton-Burr,  or  Cheetham- 
Van  Ness,  controversy  and  the  other  incidents  already 
related,  the  net  result  of  which  was  more  and  more  to 
exclude  Burr  from  the  councils  of  the  Democratic 
party.  Nearly  all  of  the  Democrats  chosen  to  the 
Legislature  in  April,  1802,  were  hostile  to  Burr,  and  in 
the  late  fall  of  that  year  practically  the  entire  Demo- 
cratic press  of  the  State,  under  the  lead  of  the  then  very 
influential  Albany  Register,  was  aligned  against  him. 

The  Twenty-sixth  Legislature  met  at  Albany  on 
January  25,  1803.  Thomas  Storm  was  reelected 
Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  and  Mr.  Van  Ingen,  a  Fed- 
eralist, was  dropped  from  the  Clerkship  of  that  house, 
which  he  had  long  filled,  and  was  succeeded  by  Solomon 
Southwick,  a  brilliant  and  aggressive  young  Democrat, 
who  was  the  brother-in-law  of  Mr.  Barber,  the  editor 
of  the  Albany  Register;  a  circumstance  which  gave 


234  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1803 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Burr's  friends  a  chance  to  say  that  his  election  to  the 
Clerkship  was  in  payment  for  the  Register's  opposition 
to  Burr,  an  entirely  unfounded  charge.  The  Governor 
in  his  address  referred  to  the  ominous  controversy  with 
Spain  over  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi  River, 
dwelt  upon  the  desirability  of  self-reliant  military  pre- 
paredness, urged  improvement  of  navigation  of  the 
Hudson  River,  and  emphasized  the  need  of  a  general 
and  permanent  system  of  common  schools  for  popular 
education  such  as  had  not  yet  been  provided.  As  before, 
his  address  was  free  from  partisanship  and  controversy. 
The  term  of  Gouverneur  Morris  in  the  United  States 
Senate  was  to  expire  on  March  4,  and  early  in  the  ses- 
sion the  duty  of  electing  his  successor  was  taken  in 
hand.  No  Federalist  could  hope  to  be  chosen,  and 
therefore  the  competition  was  confined  to  the  Demo- 
cratic party.  The  chief  aspirants  were  General 
Theodorus  Bailey,  of  Dutchess  county,  and  John 
Woodworth,  of  Rensselaer  county,  who  was  afterward 
Attorney-General  and  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court. 
At  the  party  caucus  Mr.  Woodworth  won  the  nomina- 
tion by  45  votes  to  General  Bailey's  30.  Thereupon 
Matthias  B.  Talmadge,  a  Senator,  who  was  Bailey's 
brother-in-law,  bolted  the  caucus  nomination  and 
persuaded  a  number  of  Senators  and  Assemblymen, 
chiefly  from  the  southern  part  of  the  State,  to  follow 
him.  Despite  this  defection,  on  the  next  day,  February 
1,  Mr.  Woodworth  was  nominated  in  the  Assembly, 
receiving  53  votes  to  19  for  General  Bailey  and  18  for 
Gouverneur  Morris,  whom  of  course  the  Federalists 
wished  to  reelect.  In  the  Senate  the  Federalists, 


1803]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  235 

realizing  that  Morris's  reelection  was  impossible,  under 
the  lead  of  Abraham  Van  Vechten  joined  the  bolting 
Democrats  and  voted  solidly  for  General  Bailey,  with 
the  result  that  he  received  the  Senate's  nomination.  The 
two  houses  then  met  for  joint  ballot;  the  Federalists  in 
both  Senate  and  Assembly  voted  for  General  Bailey, 
together  with  Mr.  Talmadge's  bolting  Democrats,  and 
he  was  thus  elected  by  59  votes  to  Woodworth's  57. 

During  this  session  there  occurred  the  great  scandal 
of  the  defalcation  of  the  State  Treasurer,  Mr. 
McClanan,  in  the  sum  of  more  than  $33,000.  He  had 
been  heavily  in  debt  when  he  was  appointed  to  the 
office,  and  some  of  his  creditors  were  believed  to  have 
urged  his  appointment  in  the  expectation  that  thus  he 
would  be  enabled  to  satisfy  their  claims,  which  he  in 
fact  did  by  paying  them  with  State  funds.  The  Legis- 
lature thereupon  appointed  as  his  successor  Abraham 
G.  Lansing,  brother  of  the  Chancellor,  John  Lansing, 
a  man  of  wealth,  integrity,  and  fine  business  abilities. 
It  also  enacted  that  the  Treasurer  should  thereafter  keep 
the  State  funds  in  the  Bank  of  Albany,  in  which  he 
should  have  no  private  account  of  his  own,  and  should 
permit  the  Comptroller  of  the  State  to  examine  his  bank 
book  at  least  once  a  month.  In  case  any  irregularities 
were  detected,  they  were  to  be  reported  to  the  Governor, 
who  should  immediately  suspend  the  Treasurer  from 
his  functions  and  cause  them  to  devolve  upon  the  officers 
of  the  Bank  of  Albany. 

A  law  was  enacted  on  March  19  chartering  the  New 
York  State  Bank,  an  incident  noteworthy  for  the  extra- 
ordinary ground  taken  by  the  petitioners.  They  set 


236  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1803 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

forth  that  there  were  then  only  three  banks  in  the  State 
outside  of  New  York  City.  These  were  the  Bank  of 
Columbia  at  Hudson,  the  Bank  of  Albany  at  Albany, 
and  the  Farmers'  Bank,  between  Lansingburg  and 
Troy.  The  stock  of  all  three  of  these  banks  was  chiefly 
owned  by  Federalists.  Therefore  the  petitioners  for 
the  new  bank,  who  were  all  Democrats,  asked  that  their 
charter  be  granted  in  order  that  there  might  be  at  least 
one  bank  in  the  State  under  Democratic  ownership! 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  April  6  without  day, 
and  in  the  ensuing  elections  the  Democrats  were  again 
successful,  as  indeed  they  were  that  year  in  nearly  all 
parts  of  the  United  States.  The  Democratic  majority 
in  the  State  was  8,588,  and  in  the  Assembly  they  had 
83  members  to  only  17  Federalists.  It  was  the  irony  of 
fate,  however,  that  the  sweeping  Democratic  victories 
of  that  year  were  largely  to  be  credited  to  the  good 
works  of  the  defeated  Federalists.  Peace  and  good 
relations  with  Great  Britain  were  due  to  Jay's  once 
execrated  treaty  and  to  Adams's  equally  execrated 
diplomacy,  while  the  fortunate  condition  of  national 
finances,  credit,  commerce,  and  industry  was  due  to  the 
wise  policy  of  Hamilton.  The  Democrats  were,  how- 
ever, to  be  credited  with  the  repeal  of  the  hated  Sedition 
law,  with  the  settlement  of  the  Mississippi-Louisiana 
controversy,  and  with  the  reduction  of  military  expenses 
through  the  disbanding  of  the  army. 

Then  came  two  more  resignations  of  United  States 
Senatorships.  The  first  was  that  of  DeWitt  Clinton, 
who  took  that  step  in  order  to  become  Mayor  of  New 
York  City.  The  latter  office  had  been  resigned  by 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  237 

Edward  Livingston  in  order  that  he  might  be  free  to 
accept  that  of  United  States  District  Attorney — though 
he  afterward  regretted  his  resignation  and  signified 
willingness  to  be  reappointed,  concluding  that  it  would 
not  be  inappropriate  to  hold  both  offices  at  the  same 
time.  Morgan  Lewis,  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  was  a  candidate  for  the  Mayoralty.  But  DeWitt 
Clinton,  who  longed  to  be  back  in  the  thick  of  New 
York  politics,  wanted  the  place  for  himself,  and  so  the 
Council  appointed  him  and  he  resigned  the  Senator- 
ship.  The  other  resignation  was  that  of  General  Bailey, 
who  very  soon  after  he  had  taken  his  seat  in  the  Senate 
was  appointed  postmaster  at  New  York  and  was  there- 
fore compelled  to  tender  his  resignation.  The  two  seats 
remained  vacant  until  filled  by  the  succeeding  Legisla- 
ture on  February  2,  1804,  when  John  Armstrong  and 
John  Smith  were  elected  almost  without  opposition. 

The  Twenty-seventh  Legislature  met  on  January  31, 
1804,  and  Alexander  Sheldon,  of  Montgomery  county, 
was  chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  The  Governor 
reported  to  it  the  Twelfth  amendment  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  providing  the  method  of 
electing  the  President  and  Vice-President,  and  it  was 
promptly  ratified.  Reference  was  indirectly  made  to 
the  impressment  of  American  seamen  by  foreign 
powers,  but  generally  the  address  was  devoted  to  the 
routine  interests  of  the  State.  On  April  1 1  the  Legisla- 
ture adjourned,  to  meet  again  on  November  4  for  the 
choice  of  Presidential  Electors. 

Meantime  there  was  in  progress  a  campaign  for  the 
Governorship,  and  also  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United 


238  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

States.  The  Governor  would  be  chosen  in  April,  and 
at  the  same  time  would  be  chosen  a  Legislature  which 
would  name  the  Electors  who  were  to  vote  for  President 
and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States.  That  Jeffer- 
son would  be  reelected  President  was  a  foregone  con- 
clusion. That  Burr  would  not  be  reelected  Vice- 
President  was  no  less  certain.  At  Washington  and 
throughout  the  country  generally  all  confidence  in  his 
integrity  and  even  in  his  loyalty  to  the  Union  had  been 
lost.  Nor  does  it  appear  that  Burr  himself  desired 
reelection.  The  office  of  Vice-President  was  not  to  his 
liking.  It  had  too  little  political  power,  too  little 
opportunity  for  intrigue  and  corrupt  speculation.  He 
therefore  made  no  effort  to  secure  renomination,  and 
was  quite  resigned  to  the  practically  unanimous  choice 
of  George  Clinton  as  the  Democratic  candidate  to  suc- 
ceed him. 

Clinton's  candidacy  for  the  Vice-Presidency  made  it 
necessary,  however,  for  the  Democrats  of  New  York  to 
select  another  candidate  for  Governor  of  the  State,  and 
for  that  place  Burr  hastened  to  put  himself  forward, 
apparently  with  confident  expectation  of  success.  The 
State  was  now  so  overwhelmingly  Democratic  that  he 
could  win  if  even  a  considerable  faction  of  that  party 
refused  to  support  him.  With  George  Clinton  running 
for  the  Vice-Presidency,  and  DeWitt  Clinton  in  the 
Senate  or  resigning  the  Senatorship  to  become  Mayor 
of  New  York,  and  with  the  Livingstons  all  well  pro- 
vided with  office,  he  thought  that  he  had  little  fear 
from  any  rival  from  that  Clinton-Livingston  alliance 
which  had  been  dominating  the  State;  while  of  course 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  239 

the  Schuylers  and  the  Federalist  party  were  in  a  hope- 
less minority.  Besides,  he  still  had  many  friends,  some 
of  whom  clung  to  him  because  of  his  undoubted  talents, 
some  through  dislike  of  his  opponents,  some  because  of 
the  strange  fascination  that  he  exercised  over  both 
men  and  women.  William  Van  Ness  was  still  his 
impassioned  champion.  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  son  of 
the  former  Chief-Justice,  Robert  Yates,  was  on  his  side. 
Even  Erastus  Root  favored  his  candidacy.  In  New 
York  City,  Jonathan  Fisk,  George  Gardner,  Peter 
Townsend,  Marinus  Willett,  and  David  M.  Westcott, 
among  the  foremost  citizens,  were  active  in  his  behalf. 

Burr's  friends  were  early,  though  not  first,  in  the 
field.  On  February  18  they  held  a  caucus  of  members 
of  the  Legislature  in  Albany,  and  formally  nominated 
him  for  Governor.  There  were  probably  not  more  than 
a  score  of  members  present.  William  Tabor,  a 
Dutchess  county  Assemblyman,  was  chairman,  and 
Joseph  Annin,  Senator  from  the  Western  district,  was 
secretary  of  the  caucus.  Two  days  later  Marinus 
Willett  presided  at  a  meeting  in  New  York,  at  which 
the  nomination  was  ratified.  Finally,  a  citizens'  mass- 
meeting  in  Albany  ratified  the  nomination  of  Burr,  and 
named  for  the  Lieutenant-Governorship  Oliver  Phelps, 
a  great  landowner  of  Ontario  county. 

Before  this,  however,  the  majority  of  the  Democratic 
members  of  the  Legislature  held  a  caucus  in  the 
Assembly  chamber  and  nominated  John  Lansing,  the 
Chancellor,  for  Governor,  and  John  Broome,  a  Senator 
and  member  of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  for  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor.  Mr.  Lansing  was  reluctant  to  accept. 


240  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

He  liked  the  office  of  Chancellor,  for  which  he  was 
admirably  fitted,  and  he  hesitated  to  resign  it  when  he 
still  had  ten  years  more  to  serve,  for  the  sake  of  a 
political  office  the  term  of  which  was  only  three  years. 
But  he  finally  accepted  when  it  was  urged  upon  him 
that  he  alone  could  command  the  united  strength  of  the 
party. 

Within  a  few  hours  of  Mr.  Lansing's  reluctant 
acceptance  on  that  ground,  however,  the  falsity  of  that 
ground  was  made  apparent  in  the  nomination  of  Burr. 
He  thereupon  withdrew  his  acceptance  of  the  nomina- 
tion, declaring  that  events  subsequent  to  his  acceptance 
had  convinced  him  of  the  vanity  of  the  hope  that  he 
would  be  able  to  hold  the  party  united  and  to  advance 
its  principles.  On  February  20,  therefore,  another 
Democratic  caucus  was  held,  and  after  much  discussion 
Morgan  Lewis,  Chief-Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
and  a  member  of  the  Livingston  clan,  was  nominated  in 
Mr.  Lansing's  place,  Mr.  Broome  remaining  as  candi- 
date for  Lieutenant-Governor. 

Meanwhile,  the  Federalists  were  active  but  inde- 
cisive. They  had  no  hope  of  electing  a  candidate  of 
their  own.  But  remembering  their  achievement  in  the 
Senatorial  contest  between  Bailey  and  Woodworth,  they 
reckoned  that  they  might  hold  the  balance  of  power 
between  two  Democratic  candidates.  When,  therefore, 
both  Lansing  and  Burr  were  put  forward,  they  saw 
their  opportunity,  and,  sad  to  say,  their  general 
inclination  was  to  support  Burr  against  Lansing— 
apparently  on  the  ground  that  Burr's  election  would 


MORGAN  LEWIS 

Morgan  Lewis,  4th  governor  (1804-7);  born  in  New  York 
City,  October  16,  1754;  lawyer;  soldier  in  revolution;  member 
state  legislature  1789,  1792;  attorney  general;  judge  supreme 
court,  chief  judge;  governor,  1804-7;  state  senator,  1811-14; 
quartermaster  general,  brigadier  general,  major  general,  U. 
S.  army  in  war  of  1812;  died  in  New  York  City,  April  7,  1S44. 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  241 

discredit  the  Democratic  party  while  Lansing's  would 
strengthen  it.  For  the  sake  of  damaging  the  opposing 
party  they  were  willing  to  imperil  the  welfare  of  the 
State. 

Happily,  nobler  counsels  prevailed,  dictated  by  that 
transcendent  statesman  who  had  been  the  foremost 
genius  of  the  Federalist  party  and  who  was  now  about 
to  render  through  it  his  last  great  public  service,  though 
at  the  cost  of  his  life.  Henry  Croswell,  editor  of 
the  Balance,  a  Federalist  paper  at  Hudson,  had  been 
convicted  because  Chief-Justice  Morgan  Lewis,  before 
whom  he  was  tried,  had  persisted  in  the  old  English 
rule  of  refusing  to  let  the  defendant  prove  the  truth  of 
the  alleged  libel.  Appeal  for  a  new  trial  was  made,  and 
Alexander  Hamilton,  then  easily  the  foremost  lawyer 
in  the  United  States,  went  to  Albany  to  argue  in  Cros- 
well's  behalf.  His  argument  on  that  occasion  was 
esteemed  by  Chancellor  Kent  as  the  greatest  he  ever 
made.  It  was  indeed  one  of  the  most  powerful  appeals 
for  the  liberty  of  the  press  and  for  the  rights  of  juries 
that  ever  were  made  by  anyone,  anywhere.  It  was 
fruitless  before  the  court,  which  persisted  in  its  former 
ruling.  But  it  moved  the  Legislature  at  an  early  oppor- 
tunity to  embody  his  pleadings  in  the  statute  law  by 
enacting  the  sound  American  principle  that  in  suits  for 
damages  for  libel  the  truth  of  the  alleged  libel  might  be 
pleaded  and  proved  in  defense,  and  that  the  jury  should 
be  the  judges  of  both  the  law  and  the  facts. 

It  was  while  Hamilton  was  at  Albany  on  this  errand 
that  the  Federalists  held  a  private  conference  at  Lewis's 


242  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Tavern  in  that  city  to  determine  their  course  in  the 
contest  between  Lansing  and  Burr.  Their  advance  pur- 
pose was,  as  stated,  to  support  Burr.  But  Hamilton 
would  have  none  of  it.  Three  years  before  he  had 
similarly  intervened  in  a  Democratic  conflict,  and  had 
by  his  personal  authority  secured  the  election  of  Jeffer- 
son over  Burr  as  President,  because,  as  he  wrote  to 
Gouverneur  Morris,  Burr  had  "no  principles,  public 
or  private;  and  .  .  .  will  use  the  worst  portion  of 
the  community  as  a  ladder  to  climb  to  permanent  power 
and  an  instrument  to  crush  the  better  part.  He  is,"  he 
continued,  "sanguine  enough  to  hope  everything,  daring 
enough  to  attempt  everything,  wicked  enough  to  scruple 
nothing."  That  was  Hamilton's  just  estimate  of  Burr 
in  1801,  and  it  remained  his  estimate  of  him,  confirmed 
by  subsequent  events,  in  1804. 

There  had  indeed  been  one  event,  only  a  short  time 
before  and  not  yet  althogether  ended,  which  immeasur- 
ably intensified  Hamilton's  opposition  to  Burr.  That 
was  that  inexplicably  stupid  and  wicked  design  of  some 
New  England  Federalists,  led  by  Senator  Pickering, 
who  had  been  Secretary  of  State  in  Adams's  cabinet 
and  who  was  afterward  the  chief  spirit  of  the  Hartford 
Convention,  to  dissolve  the  Union  and  to  set  up  a 
Federalist  republic  consisting  of  the  New  England 
States,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey,  with  Burr  as  its 
President!  A  more  detestable  scheme  was  never  con- 
cocted. But  it  was  vigorously  urged,  especially  by 
Pickering  and  Roger  Griswold,  at  the  beginning  of 
1804;  and  there  can  be  little  if  any  doubt  that  the 
conspirators  were  in  conference  with  the  Federalist 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  243 

members  of  the  New  York  Legislature,  and  that  the 
design  of  the  latter  to  support  Burr  for  Governor 
against  Lansing  was  suggested  by  Pickering  and  Gris- 
wold  as  an  essential  part  of  their  infernal  plot. 

This  disloyal  purpose  was  imparted  by  some  of  the 
conspirators  to  Rufus  King,  who  of  course  instantly 
disapproved  of  it.  It  was  also  made  known,  by  Picker- 
ing himself,  to  Hamilton.  What  Hamilton  replied  to 
Pickering  is  not  on  record.  We  can  easily  imagine  it. 
The  result  was  that  Hamilton  entered  the  secret  con- 
clave of  Federalists  at  Lewis's  Tavern  with  renewed 
determination  to  thwart  Burr.  He  made  a  long,  cogent, 
and  impassioned  appeal  to  the  Federalists  to  support 
Lansing  rather  than  Burr,  on  both  partisan  and  patri- 
otic grounds.  To  elect  Burr,  he  said,  would  be  to 
imperil  the  welfare  of  the  State,  and  would  give  the 
Democrats  a  formidable  leader.  But  Lansing's 
personal  character  would  afford  a  guarantee  against 
pernicious  extremes,  and  his  leadership  of  the  party 
would  not  be  so  difficult  to  overcome  as  Burr's. 

This  counsel  was  intended  to  be  confidential,  and 
indeed  the  conference  was  supposed  to  be  entirely 
secret.  But  some  of  Burr's  agents  were  listening  at  the 
keyhole,  and  promptly  reported  to  him  what  had  been 
done,  and  especially  what  Hamilton  had  said.  Burr 
therefore  realized  that  it  was  Hamilton  and  Hamilton 
alone  who  stood  between  him  and  his  ambition.  Had  it 
not  been  for  that  intervention  of  Hamilton's  the  New 
York  Federalists  would  have  supported  Burr  and  would 
probably  have  assured  his  election  as  Governor.  With 
that  achieved,  Pickering,  Griswold,  and  the  rest  would 


244  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

have  been  emboldened  to  proceed  with  their  secessionist 
conspiracy.  But  Hamilton  defeated  the  plot.  It  is 
true  that  he  did  not  succeed  in  prevailing  upon  all  the 
Federalists  to  oppose  Burr.  Griswold  in  particular 
held  out  and  in  a  published  letter  urged  all  his  friends 
to  support  Burr  and  denounced  Hamilton  for  opposing 
Burr  purely  on  grounds  of  "personal  resentment" — a 
most  ridiculous  aspersion,  that  being  one  of  the  last 
motives  of  which  Hamilton  was  capable. 

When  Lansing  retired  and  Morgan  Lewis  took  his 
place,  Hamilton  gave  his  support  to  Lewis,  while  Gris- 
wold and  the  other  conspirators  stuck  to  Burr.  The 
struggle  between  the  two  Federalist  factions  continued 
and  grew  steadily  more  intense  down  to  the  day  of  the 
election.  At  one  time  Hamilton,  fearful  of  Burr's  suc- 
cess over  Lewis,  whom  he  regarded  as  a  much  weaker 
candidate  than  Lansing,  thought  of  putting  Rufus  King 
forward  as  a  Federalist  candidate.  He  had  no  hope  of 
electing  him,  but  thought  that  he  might  command  a  full 
Federalist  vote  and  prevent  a  part  of  it  from  being  cast 
for  Burr;  but  he  relinquished  that  scheme  when  he 
found  that  Griswold  and  his  faction  would  vote  for 
Burr  even  against  King. 

DeWitt  Clinton,  of  course,  kept  up  his  fight  against 
Burr,  through  the  medium  of  Cheetham's  vitriolic  pen, 
especially  denouncing  the  methods  by  which  Burr 
sought  to  curry  favor  with  the  lowest  elements  of  the 
New  York  City  slums.  It  was  true  that  in  this  cam- 
paign Burr  introduced  for  the  first  time  the  devices 
which  afterward  made  "ward  politics"  notorious.  Jef- 
ferson was  quoted  against  Burr,  as  not  being  a  repre- 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  245 

sentative  of  true  democracy.  All  the  influence  of  the 
Clintons  and  Livingstons,  and  of  Ambrose  Spencer,  was 
ranged  relentlessly  against  Burr.  Hamilton  made  no 
speeches  and  wrote  no  letters,  but  contented  himself 
with  using  his  influence  in  private  against  the  man 
whom  he  considered  to  be  of  all  his  contemporaries  the 
most  dangerous  to  the  State  and  to  the  nation.  So  the 
fight  went  on  until  the  moment  of  the  closing  of  the 
polls.  When  the  votes  were  counted  it  was  found  that 
Burr  had  carried  his  chief  stronghold,  New  York  City, 
by  a  majority  of  about  a  hundred.  In  the  State  as  a 
whole  he  was  hopelessly  defeated.  The  vote  stood : 
Lewis,  30,829;  Burr,  22,139. 

Burr  realized  that  his  course  was  run.  He  had 
staked  everything  on  this  last  supreme  effort,  and  had 
lost.  His  anger,  resentment,  revenge  all  turned  toward 
the  man  whom  he  rightly  reckoned  to  be  chiefly 
responsible  for  his  defeat.  He  had  never  forgiven 
Hamilton  for  keeping  him  out  of  the  Presidency  in 
1801.  For  keeping  him  out  of  the  Governorship  of 
New  York  in  1804  and  out  of  the  Presidency  of  a  seced- 
ing republic,  he  resolved  to  have  revenge  at  the  cost  of 
Hamilton's  life.  For  a  time  he  meditated  secret  mur- 
der, either  by  his  own  hand  or  through  that  of  a  hired 
assassin.  But  from  that  course  he  was  deterred  by  two 
considerations.  One  was  the  personal  peril;  the  other 
was  the  lack  of  the  publicity  which  he  craved.  So  he 
decided  upon  a  duel,  in  which  he  could  kill  Hamilton 
without  incurring  the  penalty  of  the  law,  and  could 
enjoy  the  satisfaction  of  having  it  publicly  known  that 
he  had  done  it.  Accordingly  he  set  diligently  to  work 


246  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

to  perfect  himself  in  marksmanship,  knowing  that 
Hamilton,  never  a  skilled  shot,  was  and  would  be  quite 
out  of  practice  with  arms.  When  he  deemed  himself 
sufficiently  skillful,  he  wrote  Hamilton,  with  Van  Ness's 
aid,  a  studiedly  offensive  letter.  Dr.  Cooper,  of  Albany, 
had  written  to  a  friend  that  Hamilton  had  declared  to 
him  that  he  regarded  Burr  as  dangerous  and  added  that 
he  could  relate  "a  still  more  despicable  opinion"  which 
Hamilton  had  expressed  of  Burr.  Referring  to  this, 
Burr  curtly  demanded  that  Hamilton  should  make  "a 
prompt  and  unqualified  acknowledgment  or  denial"  of 
the  use  of  any  expression  which  could  justify  Dr. 
Cooper's  statement.  Hamilton  replied  temperately, 
declining  to  make  either  acknowledgment  or  denial, 
since  he  had  no  recollection  of  the  matter  and  could 
not  recall  what  Dr.  Cooper  referred  to.  He  stood 
ready  to  give  an  accounting  for  anything  with  which  he 
was  directly  charged,  but  he  could  not  undertake  to 
interpret  the  inferences  drawn  by  third  parties.  Burr's 
response,  probably  written  by  Van  Ness,  was  still  more 
offensive  than  his  first  note.  To  this  Hamilton  replied 
formally,  and  then  caused  the  suggestion  to  be  imparted 
to  Burr  that  he  should  inquire  into  the  purport  of  the 
conversation  with  Dr.  Cooper  and  ascertain  precisely 
to  what  that  gentleman  had  referred  in  his  letter, 
declaring  his  readiness  to  meet  the  result,  which  he  was 
confident  would  show  that  the  conversation  had  related 
entirely  to  political  matters.  This  Burr  denounced  as 
"mere  evasion,"  and  a  little  later  he  sent  Hamilton  the 
challenge  which  from  the  first  he  had  planned. 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  247 

Under  the  "code  of  honor"  Burr  was  entirely  in  the 
wrong.  He  had  no  sufficient  pretext  for  the  challenge. 
But  it  was  necessary,  in  the  state  of  mind  which  then 
prevailed,  for  Hamilton  to  accept  the  challenge  or 
suffer  disgrace.  He  accepted,  but  the  duel  was 
deferred  for  a  fortnight  in  order  that  he  might  conclude 
some  important  cases  in  court.  In  that  time  Hamilton 
went  about  his  business  as  usual,  while  Burr  devoted 
himself  largely  to  pistol  practice  at  a  target.  On  July 
4  they  both  attended  the  dinner  of  the  Society  of  the 
Cincinnati,  of  which  Hamilton  had  succeeded  Wash- 
ington as  president.  Hamilton  was  the  gayest  of  the 
company,  while  Burr,  somewhat  taciturn  and  moody, 
left  before  the  festivities  were  ended.  A  little  later 
Hamilton  dined  with  Colonel  Trumbull,  who  had  been 
one  of  Washington's  aids;  attended  a  reception  given 
by  Oliver  Wolcott;  and  wrote  an  earnest  letter  to 
Theodore  Sedgwick,  one  of  Pickering's  accomplices, 
sternly  warning  him  against  all  conspiracies  for  dis- 
solution of  the  Union.  The  impending  duel  was  kept 
a  secret  from  all  but  less  than  a  dozen  of  his  friends. 

On  the  morning  of  Wednesday,  July  11,  Hamilton 
and  his  second,  Pendleton,  crossed  the  ferry  from  New 
York  to  Weehawken.  With  his  second,  Van  Ness,  and 
Dr.  Hosack,  Burr  crossed  by  the  preceding  boat.  Ten 
paces  were  measured  out,  the  pistols  were  loaded,  the 
principals  were  placed  in  position,  and  the  word  was 
given.  Burr  instantly  aimed  and  fired,  Hamilton  not 
so  much  as  raising  his  weapon.  It  was  enough.  Ham- 
ilton fell  forward,  discharging  his  pistol  into  the 
ground  as  he  did  so.  "This  is  a  fatal  wound,  Doctor," 


248  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

he  gasped,  and  fainted.  Burr  and  Van  Ness  inconti- 
nently fled  from  the  ground  without  looking  behind 
them.  Hamilton  was  conveyed  to  his  home,  where  he 
lingered  on  for  thirty-one  hours,  giving  all  his  thoughts 
meanwhile  to  the  consolation  of  his  wife  and  his  friends. 
Thus  perished  that  man  who,  taken  all  in  all,  was 
probably  the  greatest  constructive  statesman  in  Ameri- 
can history  and  one  of  the  half-dozen  greatest  in  the 
history  of  the  world.  Chancellor  Kent  indulged  in  no 
flight  of  fancy  when  he  said  that  "had  he  lived  twenty 
years  longer"  (Hamilton  was  only  forty-seven)  "he 
would  have  rivalled  Socrates  or  Bacon,  or  any  other  of 
the  sages  of  ancient  or  modern  times,  in  researches  after 
truth  and  in  benevolence  to  mankind."  He  perished  at 
the  purposeful  hand  of  that  man  who,  taken  all  in  all, 
was  probably  the  most  detestable  of  all  who  have 
attained  prominence  in  American  history,  and  one  of 
the  most  detestable  in  the  history  of  the  world.  There 
is  none  so  devoid  of  redeeming  qualities,  and  none 
whose  evil  deeds  were  so  gratuitous  and  wanton.  It  is 
impossible  to  forget  the  almost  intolerable  provocation 
which  Benedict  Arnold  suffered  in  the  injustice  of 
Congress  and  of  some  of  his  military  associates.  He 
should  not  have  yielded  to  the  temptation  of  that  provo- 
cation, yet  we  cannot  forget  that  the  provocation  was 
there.  But  Burr  had  no  such  provocation.  He  had  no 
grievance.  His  wickedness  was  unprovoked,  delib- 
erate, committed  for  the  sheer  sake  of  wickedness, 
because  he  preferred  evil  to  good.  In  every  relation  of 
life  he  was  false ;  for  even  the  notion  that  his  love  for  his 
daughter  was  the  one  pure  passion  of  his  life  must  be 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  249 

abandoned  in  the  knowledge  that  he  intended  to  leave 
her  a  legacy  which  would  if  possible  corrupt  her  mind 
and  soul.  There  may  have  been  others  approximating 
him  in  the  promiscuous  and  unscrupulous  gratification 
of  sexual  lust,  but  there  was  reserved  for  him  the  unique 
infamy  of  taking  detailed  and  laborious  pains  to  betray 
and  to  expose  to  the  knowledge  of  the  world  each  indi- 
vidual victim  of  his  unclean  passion.  In  many  years  of 
incessantly  active  public  life  he  performed  not  a  single 
deed  of  importance  for  the  good  of  his  fellow-men  or 
that  is  remembered  to  his  credit.  In  his  private  life  it 
may  truly  be  said  of  him,  in  reversed  application  of  a 
famous  epitaph,  that  he  touched  nobody  whom  he  did 
not  defile. 

The  one  poor  consolation  which  the  State,  the  nation, 
and  humanity  had  for  the  irreparable  loss  of  Hamilton 
was  in  the  fact  that  they  thus  were  rid  of  Burr.  For  his 
murderous  shot  at  Weehawken  destroyed  his  power  for 
evil  and  ended  his  public  career  as  instantly  and  as 
certainly  as  it  destroyed  Hamilton's  physical  life.  From 
that  moment  he  was  an  outcast,  shunned,  despised,  and 
detested.  "The  damned  reptile,"  was  Morgan  Lewis's 
only  mention  of  him,  and  it  was  by  no  means  the  most 
severe.  Some  of  the  filth  and  corruption  which  he  had 
spawned  into  New  York  politics  remained,  to  be  a 
source  of  ferment  and  of  poison.  Otherwise,  he  was 
gone.  He  reappears  no  more  in  the  history  of  New 
York. 

Nor  have  we,  indeed,  much  more  to  do  with  Hamil- 
ton. His  gigantic  genius  had  not  been  circumscribed 
by  the  boundaries  of  the  Empire  State.  The  most 


250  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

illustrious  citizen  New  York  has  ever  had,  his  labors 
were  chiefly  performed  for  the  whole  nation  rather 
than  for  the  State.  He  had  no  part  in  the  organization 
of  the  State,  and  he  held  no  office  in  its  government. 
His  influence  upon  its  affairs  and  its  destinies  was  at 
times  dominant  and  controlling,  but  it  was  merely 
incidental  to  his  greater  work  for  the  whole  United 
States. 

The  one  incomparable  figure  in  the  first  generation 
of  New  York's  history  was  that  of  Jay.  He  was  to  the 
State  what  Hamilton  was  to  the  nation.  But  he,  too, 
was  now  forever  removed  from  active  participation  in 
public  affairs,  not  by  death  or  exile  but  by  voluntary 
retirement  to  a  repose  more  fully  earned  by  him  than 
by  any  other  man  of  his  time.  The  variety,  the 
incessancy,  the  arduous  importance  of  his  labors  for 
State  and  nation  during  thirty  years  had  exceeded  those 
of  any  other  man  in  either  the  early  or  the  later  history 
of  the  American  republic.  He  had  been  legislator  and 
executive,  jurist  and  diplomat,  advocate  and  financier, 
revolutionary  propagandist  and  constitutional  con- 
structor; he  had  been  one  of  the  three  chief  framers  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  practically  the 
sole  author  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State  of  New 
York;  he  had  made  the  treaty  which  reestablished  peace 
and  recognized  the  independence  of  America  at  the  end 
of  the  Revolution,  and  the  subsequent  treaty  which 
complemented  the  former  and  gave  America  her  proper 
place  among  the  nations;  he  had  been  the  propounder 
of  the  most  significant  and  important  judicial  dictum  in 
the  first  dozen  years  of  American  jurisprudence;  and 


1804]  THE  SUPREME  TRAGEDY  251 

second  to  Washington  alone  he  had  been  an  unrivalled 
personal  force  for  purity  of  life,  for  unselfish  patriotic 
devotion,  and  for  the  loftiest  ennoblements  of  human 
society  and  human  life.  He  had  passed  out  of  all  active 
participation  in  New  York's  political  and  govern- 
mental history,  but  he  had  left  behind  him  a  beneficent 
influence,  incomparable  and  imperishable. 


NEVER,  perhaps,  was  the  political  leadership  of 
a  great  State  more  completely  transformed  in 
so  short  a  time  than  was  that  of  New  York  in 
1804.  All  the  great  figures  of  the  preceding  years  were 
removed.  Hamilton  was  dead.  Burr  was  worse  than 
dead.  Jay  was  in  retirement.  Clinton  was  about  to  be 
retired  to  the  Vice-Presidency.  Robert  R.  Livingston 
was  Minister  to  France.  A  new  era  had  come,  with 
new  men  at  the  fore.  Something  of  the  old  family  rule 
and  feuds  was  still  to  persist,  through  the  dominant 
activities  of  DeWitt  Clinton.  But  in  the  persons  of 
such  men  as  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  there  were  arising 
leaders  who  had  no  connection  with  any  of  the  three 
great  houses. 

Morgan  Lewis  became  Governor  at  the  beginning  of 
July,  1804.  He  had  begun  his  career  as  a  soldier  of  the 
Revolution  with  brilliant  promise,  but  the  promise  had 
not  been  fulfilled  and  never  was  fulfilled.  He  was  an 
efficient  army  officer,  and  after  the  war  he  became  a 
competent  and  fairly  successful  lawyer.  His  political 
preferment  was  due  entirely  to  his  relationship  to  the 
Livingstons,  though  he  justified  it  by  showing  himself 
at  least  entirely  respectable  as  Attorney-General  and  as 
Chief-Justice.  The  brilliance  of  his  student  days  at 
Princeton  had  vanished.  But  he  was  safe  and  sound. 

252 


1804]  THE  NEW  ERA  253 

industrious  and  honest.  Ability  for  leadership  he  had 
none,  but  he  made  an  acceptable  public  servant. 

His  first  act  after  his  inauguration  was  to  convene 
the  Council  of  Appointment,  of  whose  activities  there 
was  need.  By  accepting  the  Governorship  he  had  left 
the  Chief-Justiceship  vacant.  The  Council  admirably 
filled  that  place  by  the  promotion  of  James  Kent  from 
an  Associate-Justiceship,  and  then  filled  the  latter  place 
by  the  appointment  of  young  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  who 
only  three  months  before  had  been  elected  a  Repre- 
sentative in  Congress.  It  was  an  extraordinary  thing 
to  appoint  so  young  and  inexperienced  a  man  as  Mr. 
Tompkins  to  such  a  place  on  the  bench,  and  it  is  prob- 
ably to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  practically  all  the 
elder  jurists  of  importance  were  Federalists.  Already 
political  considerations  had  entered  into  the  choice  of 
Judges.  However,  of  Mr.  Tompkins's  fitness  for  the 
place  there  was  no  question. 

There  followed  two  other  appointments  of  a  far  less 
worthy  character.  One  was  that  of  a  Mr.  Tiffany  as 
Clerk  of  Ontario  county  in  place  of  Peter  B.  Porter, 
who  was  removed  from  the  office  for  no  other  reason 
than  that  he  had  been  a  friend  of  Burr.  It  does  not 
appear  that  Mr.  Porter  was  an  offensive  partisan, 
certainly  not  that  he  participated  in  any  of  Burr's  scoun- 
drelism.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  an  excellent  public 
servant,  whose  retention  in  office  was  generally  desired 
by  the  people  without  regard  to  party.  He  was  after- 
ward a  distinguished  Representative  in  Congress  and 
Secretary  of  War  in  the  cabinet  of  John  Quincy 
Adams — a  man  of  parts  and  character.  His  dismissal 


254  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1804 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

from  office  to  make  room  for  a  comparatively  insignifi- 
cant friend  of  the  Governor's  was  an  unfortunate  and 
inauspicious  incident,  though  not  at  all  incongruous 
with  some  of  the  preceding  performances  of  the  Coun- 
cil in  that  dawning  age  of  spoils. 

The  other  appointment  was  in  some  respects  still 
more  offensive.  It  was  that  of  Maturin  Livingston  as 
Recorder  of  New  York.  This  man  was  a  Livingston 
and  he  was  the  Governor's  brother-in-law,  but  he  had 
absolutely  nothing  else  to  recommend  him  for  that  very 
important  office.  As  a  lawyer  he  was  of  the  third 
class,  lacking  in  knowledge  and  in  industry.  In  char- 
acter he  was  not  above  reproach,  some  of  his  indul- 
gences in  social  pleasures  being  of  at  least  dubious 
propriety.  As  a  man  his  temperatment  and  manners 
made  him  intensely  unpopular.  That  such  a  man, 
solely  because  of  family  relationship,  should  be  forced 
into  one  of  the  most  responsible  offices  in  the  chief  city 
of  the  State,  was  little  short  of  a  scandal.  More,  it  was 
a  disastrous  thing  for  Lewis  himself  and  for  the  Living- 
ston family,  for  it  greatly  displeased  DeWitt  Clinton, 
who  was  then  Mayor  of  New  York,  and  led  to  his  hos- 
tility to  Lewis  and  to  the  whole  Livingston  clan. 

The  Twenty-eighth  Legislature  met  on  November  6, 
1804,  for  the  special  purpose  of  choosing  Presidential 
Electors,  and  Alexander  Sheldon  was  reflected  Speaker. 
In  his  opening  address  the  Governor  reported  the  going 
into  force  of  the  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tion for  the  election  of  President  and  Vice-President, 
which  was  calculated  to  avoid  a  repetition  of  the 
"unpleasant  scene"  which  had  marked  the  preceding 


1804-5]  THE  NEW  ERA  255 

election.  He  called  attention  to  the  need  of  a  law  pro- 
viding for  the  filling  of  vacancies  in  the  Electoral  Col- 
lege, which  the  Legislature  promptly  supplied..  John 
Armstrong's  mission  to  France  had  caused  another 
vacancy  in  a  Senatorship,  which  the  Legislature  filled 
by  the  election  of  Dr.  Samuel  L.  Mitchell.  Much 
attention  was  paid  in  the  address  to  the  need  of  reform 
in  the  State  prisons  and  in  the  administration  of 
criminal  law,  and  the  further  fortification  of  the  port  of 
New  York  and  the  development  of  public  education 
were  earnestly  urged.  The  Legislature,  after  choosing 
Presidential  Electors  and  enacting  the  law  for  the 
filling  of  vacancies  in  the  College,  adjourned  on 
November  12. 

The  regular  session  opened  on  January  28,  1805.  On 
February  5  the  Governor  addressed  to  the  Legislature 
an  elaborate  message  on  the  subject  of  public  education, 
in  which  he  proposed  that  the  extensive  public  lands  of 
the  State,  about  1,500,000  acres,  should  be  devoted  to 
the  purpose.  From  their  sale  a  fund  should  be  secured, 
to  be  put  under  the  charge  of  the  Regents  of  the  State 
University,  for  the  support  of  colleges,  academies,  and 
common  schools.  In  response,  the  Legislature  on  April 
2  enacted  a  law  setting  apart  500,000  acres  of  land  for 
the  creation  of  a  fund  for  the  establishment  and  support 
of  common  schools.  Another  law  incorporated  "the 
Society  instituted  in  the  city  of  New  York  for  the 
establishment  of  a  free  school  for  the  education  of  poor 
children  who  do  not  belong  to  or  are  not  provided  for 
by  any  religious  society."  A  third  provided  for  the 


256  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1805 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

establishment  of  Union  College  and  for  the  conduct  of 
public  lotteries  for  its  endowment.  On  April  10  the 
Legislature  adjourned  without  day. 

During  this  year  Benson  Hobart,  the  United  States 
District  Judge  for  the  State  of  New  York,  died.  The 
succession  was  offered  by  the  President  to  Brockholst 
Livingston,  who  declined  to  accept  it.  Then  it  was 
given  to  Matthias  B.  Talmadge,  who  as  a  State  Senator 
had  in  1803  led  the  bolt  in  the  Legislature  in  favor  of 
his  brother-in-law,  Theodorus  Bailey,  for  United 
States  Senator,  against  John  Woodworth,  the  regular 
nominee  of  the  Democratic  caucus.  This  appointment 
was  probably  due  to  the  influence  of  George  Clinton, 
who  had  become  Vice-President,  to  whom  Talmadge 
was  related  by  marriage.  It  was  an  unfortunate  one, 
however,  because  of  Mr.  Talmadge's  unfitness  for  the 
place.  He  was  not  of  high  legal  attainments,  he  was 
more  indolent  than  industrious,  and  he  was  a  physical 
invalid.  His  incapacity  led  a  few  years  later  to  the 
division  of  the  State  into  two  judicial  districts  and  to 
the  appointment  of  William  P.  Van  Ness  as  Judge  of 
the  more  important  Southern  district,  while  Talmadge 
was  left  in  the  less  important  Northern  district  until  his 
death  in  1820. 

The  most  important  controversy  of  the  year  1804 
related  to  banking  interests,  which  were  rapidly 
increasing  in  importance.  Mention  has  already  been 
made  of  the  chartering  of  the  State  Bank  in  1803  as  a 
Democratic  concern.  Previously  there  had  been  organ- 
ized by  Hamilton  and  his  friends  a  joint  stock 
Merchants'  Bank,  in  New  York,  and  also  by  other 


JAMES  KENT 

James  Kent,  chancellor;  born  in  Putnam  county,  July  31, 
1763;  lawyer;  served  in  state  legislature,  1791-93;  master  in 
chancery,  1793;  recorder  of  New  York  City,  1797;  justice 
supreme  court,  1798;  chief  justice,  1804;  appointed  chancellor, 
October  25,  1814  and  retired  at  60,  the  age  limit,  in  1823; 
died  in  Xew  York  City,  December  12,  1847. 


1805]  THE  NEW  ERA  257 

capitalists  a  similar  concern  known  as  the  Mercantile 
Company,  at  Albany.  These  private  banks  applied  for 
charters,  which  were  refused,  largely,  it  was  believed, 
because  of  the  opposition  of  the  State  Bank,  whose 
promoters  had  at  first  promised  to  support  the  appli- 
cations. The  Merchants'  Bank  renewed  its  application 
for  a  charter  in  1804.  But  the  Legislature,  influenced 
by  DeWitt  Clinton  and  others  interested  in  the  Man- 
hattan Company,  again  refused  it.  Nor  was  the 
Legislature  content  with  mere  refusal.  It  enacted  a  bill 
forbidding  the  conduct  of  the  banking  business  by 
unincorporated  concerns,  under  heavy  penalties,  and 
declaring  all  notes  or  other  securities  issued  by  them  to 
be  void  of  value.  The  Merchants'  Bank  of  New  York 
and  the  Mercantile  Company  of  Albany,  which  though 
without  charters  were  conducting  an  extensive,  profit- 
able, and  stable  business,  were  notified  to  retire  there- 
from on  or  before  the  first  Tuesday  of  May,  1 805,  under 
peril  of  the  full  penalty  of  the  law. 

A  bitter  controversy  raged  over  this  matter  during  the 
year,  and  was  continued  in  the  next  Legislature,  in  1805, 
when  the  Merchants'  Bank  renewed  its  application  for  a 
charter.  DeWitt  Clinton  opposed  the  granting  of  the 
charter  on  the  ostensible  ground  that  two  banks  were 
sufficient  for  the  business  needs  of  New  York  and  that 
the  creation  of  a  third  would  be  contrary  to  public 
interest.  His  real  reasons  were,  however,  doubtless 
that  he  wished  to  prevent  competition  with  his  own 
Manhattan  Company,  and  that,  as  declared  frankly  by 
the  Democratic  press,  he  did  not  want  any  more  Fed- 
eralist banks  started.  Governor  Lewis,  on  the  other 


258  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1805 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

hand,  favored  granting  the  charter  to  the  Merchants' 
Bank.  He  did  not  agree  with  Clinton's  narrow 
partisanship,  he  had  a  more  adequate  estimate  of  the 
growing  needs  of  business,  and  he  had  above  all  a  truer 
sense  of  justice  to  the  company  concerned.  The  Mer- 
chants' Bank  had  begun  its  career  under  the  sanction  of 
the  law  in  good  faith,  had  invested  large  sums  of 
money  in  a  building  and  in  other  operations,  and  was 
conducting  its  business  in  an  honest  and  trustworthy 
manner,  and  it  ought,  therefore,  to  have  been  permitted 
to  continue  its  existence. 

When  the  matter  came  up  in  the  Legislature  of  1805, 
Clinton  sent  Maturin  Livingston  to  Albany  to  argue 
with  the  Legislature  against  granting  the  charter.  But 
no  sooner  had  he  reached  the  capital  than  he  changed 
sides  and  became  a  strong  advocate  of  the  Merchants' 
Bank  and  its  application.  It  does  not  appear  that  he 
was  corruptly  influenced,  though  his  integrity  was  not 
of  a  fiber  so  robust  as  to  be  always  superior  to  suspicion. 
Neither  can  we  be  assured  that  he  acted  on  principle 
and  conviction  of  justice.  It  seems  probable  that  he  was 
influenced  by  the  Governor,  to  whom  he  was  closely 
related  and  to  whom  he  owed  his  official  position.  His 
arguments,  together  with  the  strongly-exerted  influence 
of  the  Governor,  apparently  sufficed  to  secure  the 
granting  of  the  charter  by  a  considerable  majority, 
composed  of  all  the  Federalists  and  many  Democrats, 
though  a  little  later  the  prevalence  of  other  influences 
was  disclosed. 

From  the  Legislature  the  bill  went  before  the  Council 
of  Revision,  and  there  the  conflict  was  renewed  with 


1805]  THE  NEW  ERA  259 

added  violence.  Justice  Ambrose  Spencer  vigorously 
opposed  the  measure  and  moved  for  the  vetoing  of  it. 
His  first  ground  was,  that  another  bank  was  not  needed 
in  New  York,  and  that  the  establishment  of  it  would 
be  prejudicial  to  public  interest.  That  was  a  weak 
ground,  the  validity  of  which  was  generally  discredited. 
But  the  second  was  more  formidable.  He  charged  that 
the  passage  of  the  bill  had  been  procured  through 
bribery  and  corruption  of  members  of  the  Legislature. 
Thus,  in  the  Senate  it  had  passed  by  a  vote  of  14  to  12. 
One  of  the  14  was  Ebenezer  Purdy,  who,  Justice 
Spencer  declared,  had  been  bribed  by  the  Merchants' 
Bank.  Had  Purdy  voted  against  the  charter,  as  he 
would  have  done  but  for  the  bribe,  it  would  have  been 
defeated.  This  serious  charge  was  based  upon  the 
affidavits  of  Messrs.  German  and  Thorn,  Democratic 
members  of  the  Assembly,  to  the  effect  that  Purdy  ha 
offered  them  large  compensation  for  their  votes  if  they, 
would  cast  them  in  favor  of  the  bill,  and  had  told  them 
that  he  had  been  persuaded  to  favor  the  charter  at  a 
confidential  conference  with  the  directors  of  the  Mer- 
chants' Bank.  Justice  Spencer  argued,  with  much 
force,  that  for  the  Council  of  Revision  to  ignore  these 
scandalous  circumstances,  and  to  sanction  a  measure 
thus  tainted  with  corruption,  would  be  subversive  of 
pure  legislation  and  a  reproach  to  the  government  of 
the  State. 

There  was  no  question  of  Justice  Spencer's  sincerity. 
Neither,  unhappily,  was  there  much  doubt  of  the  truth 
of  the  charges  against  Senator  Purdy,  who  presently 
resigned  his  seat  in  order  to  escape  an  investigation. 


260  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1805 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Resignation,  as  Webster  said  of  suicide,  was  confession. 
Nevertheless  the  Council  of  Revision  declined  to  veto 
the  bill,  and  the  charter  was  thus  granted.  There  was 
and  can  be,  of  course,  no  thought  that  the  Council  was 
animated  by  improper  motives,  any  more  than  that 
Governor  Lewis  was  corrupted  by  the  bank  directors. 
Chief-Justice  Kent  was  of  all  men  one  of  the  purest  and 
most  incorruptible.  He  was  also  one  of  the  most 
inclined  to  take  a  broad  and  catholic  view  of  the  case 
and  to  favor  the  chartering  of  the  bank  on  the  grounds 
of  equity  which  had  been  set  forth  by  Maturin  Living- 
ston, and  of  the  rapidly  growing  needs  of  the  business 
of  the  metropolis.  The  Governor  was  already  strongly 
committed  to  the  charter.  Justices  Brockholst  Living- 
ston and  Smith  Thompson  were  members  of  the 
Livingston  family,  and  therefore  stood  with  the  Gov- 
ernor and  against  DeWitt  Clinton;  and  Chancellor 
Lansing  stood  with  them.  Thus  the  Merchants'  Bank 
won  its  charter,  though  with  an  ineffaceable  taint  upon 
it;  and  thus  an  irremediable  breach,  though  as  yet  not 
openly  recognized,  was  created  between  the  Clinton  and 
Livingston  clans. 

Closely  following  upon  these  transactions  came  the 
April  elections  of  1805.  Senator  Broome  having  been 
elected  Lieutenant-Governor,  his  seat  was  vacated,  and 
DeWitt  Clinton  was  put  forward  to  fill  it;  Ezra 
L'Hommedieu  also  being  nominated  for  reelection 
from  the  same  (Southern)  district.  General  Bailey, 
who  had  become  postmaster  of  New  York,  was  chair- 
man of  the  convention  which  nominated  these  candi- 
dates, and  he  and  his  associates  made  it  clear  that  they 


1805]  THE  NEW  ERA  261 

specially  favored  Messrs.  Clinton  and  L'Hommedieu 
because  that  charter  had  been  corruptly  secured  but 
partly,  and  chiefly,  because  "a  new  bank  has  been 
created  in  our  city  and  its  charter  granted  to  political 
enemies"!  Both  these  candidates  were  elected,  as  were 
the  Democratic  candidates  generally  throughout  the 
State.  In  the  Eastern  district  there  was  a  serious  split 
in  that  party  over  a  Senatorship.  Joseph  C.  Yates, 
afterward  Governor  of  the  State,  was  regularly  nom- 
inated, at  Schenectady,  but  the  Democrats  of  Albany 
refused  to  accept  him  and  named  Mr.  Quackenboss 
instead.  DeWitt  Clinton's  influence  was  given  to 
Quackenboss,  and  he  received  the  majority  of  Demo- 
cratic votes ;  but  all  the  Federalists,  having  no  candidate 
of  their  own,  voted  for  Yates  and  thus  elected  him. 
The  Democrats  secured  an  overwhelming  majority  in 
the  Assembly,  a  circumstance  which  proved  more 
mischievous  than  beneficial  to  them. 

Soon  after  the  election  open  war  began  in  the  press 
between  Clinton  and  Lewis.  Clinton's  New  York 
organ,  the  American  Citizen,  and  the  Register  of 
Albany,  which  also  was  friendly  to  him,  began  a  series 
of  persistent  attacks  upon  the  Governor  and  all  his 
friends.  Burr's  paper  in  New  York,  the  Chronicle, 
was  merged  with  the  Poughkeepsie  Journal,  and  that 
paper,  edited  by  Isaac  Mitchell  and  probably  controlled 
by  Dr.  Tillotson,  the  Secretary  of  State,  led  a  furious 
counter-attack  upon  DeWitt  Clinton  and  all  his  friends, 
especially  Justice  Spencer;  in  which  it  was  seconded  by 
the  Plebeian,  an  Ulster  county  paper  directed  by  Jesse 
Buel,  afterward  editor  of  the  Albany  Argus.  This 


262  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1805 


controversy,  which  became  exceedingly  acrimonious, 
was  begun  by  Clinton's  friends,  presumably  at  Clinton's 
own  incitement,  Lewis  never  manifesting  any  animosity 
toward  Clinton  until  the  latter  had  attacked  him. 
Doubtless  Clinton  resented  Lewis's  appointment  of  his 
own  friends  and  relatives  to  office;  yet  considering  his 
own  record  he  was  the  last  man  in  the  State  who  should 
have  made  that  a  cause  of  conflict. 

It  is  difficult  to  avoid  the  conviction  that  the  quarrel 
was  deliberately  forced  by  DeWitt  Clinton  for  the  sake 
of  overthrowing  the  power  of  the  Livingston  family 
and  making  himself  supreme.  To  that  end  Clinton 
began  making  overtures  to  some  of  the  former  adherents 
of  Burr,  among  whom  there  were  men  of  character  and 
influence,  such  as  John  Swartwout,  with  whom  Clinton 
had  fought  a  duel,  and  Peter  Irving,  brother  of  Wash- 
ington Irving  and  editor  of  Burr's  Morning  Chronicle, 
There  were  not  enough  of  them,  with  their  followers,  to 
maintain  a  formidable  party  organization  of  their  own, 
and  they  had  no  leader  since  the  downfall  of  Burr.  But 
they  would  be  an  important  accession  to  some  other 
party  or  faction.  To  exactly  what  extent  overtures 
were  made  to  them  by  Clinton,  and  indeed  also  by  some 
Federalists,  is  not  to  be  ascertained,  but  that  some  were 
made  is  not  to  be  doubted.  A  few  years  later  Matthew 
L.  Davis  of  New  York  addressed  a  series  of  open  letters 
to  DeWitt  Clinton  explicitly  charging  that  in  Decem- 
ber, 1805,  Levi  McKean,  of  Poughkeepsie,  a  Burrite, 
had  informed  his  friends  that  proposals  had  been  made 
"by  the  Clintonians  to  form  a  union  with  the  Burrites" ; 
that  Clinton,  Swartwout,  Peter  Irving,  Davis,  General 


1805]  THE  NEW  ERA  263 

Bailey,  and  Ezekiel  Robins  had  participated  in  a  direct 
personal  conference,  in  which  such  union  was  fully 
agreed  upon ;  and  that  under  the  terms  of  the  union 
Burr  was  to  be  recognized  as  a  member  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party,  that  Clinton's  paper,  the  American 
Citizen,  should  stop  attacking  Burr  and  his  friends  and 
should  recognize  them  as  having  all  along  been  good 
Democrats,  and  that  Burr's  friends  should  be  as  eligible 
to  office  as  the  Clintonians. 

Clinton  promptly  denied  the  truth  of  all  these  state- 
ments and  announced  that  he  would  begin  suit  against 
the  publisher  of  them  for  libel,  the  name  of  the  writer 
of  them  not  being  at  the  time  disclosed.  The  publisher 
cheerfully  responded  that  he  was  quite  ready  for  the 
suit,  and  that  he  purposed  in  defense  to  prove  the  truth 
of  all  the  allegations.  It  was  significant  that  the  suit 
was  not  pressed,  but  that  Clinton  let  the  matter  drop. 
The  impression  was  thus  irresistibly  conveyed  that  there 
was  some  truth  in  Davis's  charges,  which  Clinton  was 
reluctant  to  have  judicially  proved.  That  there  was 
also  much  exaggeration  is  not  to  be  doubted.  Davis 
was  an  intense  and  probably  not  over-scrupulous 
partisan,  and  there  is  reason  to  suspect  that  he  was 
endeavoring  to  damage  the  standing  of  Clinton  with  the 
masses  of  the  Democratic  party  who  were  implacably 
hostile  to  Burr  and  all  his  works.  But  it  seems  to  be 
certain  that  Clinton's  close  friend,  General  Bailey,  had 
conference  with  Burr's  friend  Swartwout,  that  Clinton 
himself  had  at  least  one  conference  with  Swartwout, 
that  several  of  the  leaders  of  both  factions  had  a  cordial 


264  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1805-6 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

meeting,  and  that  a  considerable  loan  was  made  by  the 
Manhattan  Bank,  which  was  under  Clinton's  control, 
to  a  leader  of  the  Burrites. 

Four  days  after  the  meeting  of  the  leaders  just 
referred  to,  which  occurred  at  Dyde's  Hotel,  a  much 
larger  meeting  of  protest  against  it  and  of  denunciation 
of  the  reported  union  was  held  at  Martling's  Long 
Room,  in  New  York,  then  the  headquarters  of  the  Tam- 
many Society,  participated  in  by  some  of  Burr's  fol- 
lowers and  by  a  larger  number  of  Democrats,  and  prob- 
ably incited  by  the  friends  of  Governor  Lewis.  At  this 
meeting  a  new  Democratic  faction  was  formed,  which 
for  a  time  was  known  throughout  the  State  as  Martling 
Men,  but  which  in  fact  was  practically  identical  with 
the  Tammany  Society.  DeWitt  Clinton,  apparently 
foreseeing  its  importance,  made  haste  to  try  to  placate 
it,  and  wrote  from  Albany  to  his  friend  Bailey  repudi- 
ating the  former  meeting  at  Dyde's  Hotel  and  approv- 
ing the  utterances  of  the  meeting  at  Martling's.  But 
this  was  in  vain.  The  new  faction  was  inexorably 
opposed  to  Clinton  and  persisted  in  its  hostility  until 
for  a  time  it  drove  him  from  power  and  office. 

Thus  the  stage  was  set  for  the  opening  of  the  drama 
at  Albany  when  the  Legislature  met  in  January,  1806. 
It  must  be  confessed  that  both  Clinton  and  Lewis  were 
making  mistakes,  as  both  afterward  had  cause  to  realize 
and  to  regret.  In  favoring  the  granting  of  a  charter  to 
the  Merchants'  Bank  the  Governor  undoubtedly 
offended  the  majority  of  his  party,  and  by  persisting  in 
that  course  after  the  bribery  scandal  had  been  exposed 
he  outraged  non-partisan  public  opinion.  We  may 


1806]  THE  NEW  ERA  265 

sympathize  with  his  resentment  at  Clinton's  autocratic 
airs,  but  must  recognize  his  folly  in  playing  into  Clin- 
ton's hand  by  giving  him  a  plausible  pretext  for  an  open 
fight.  As  a  matter  of  tactics  and  prudence  he  should 
have  realized  that  the  power  of  the  Livingstons  was 
rapidly  waning  while  that  of  the  Clintons  was  unim- 
paired if  not  increasing,  and  that  alliance  was  his  true 
policy  rather  than  war.  For  Robert  R.  Livingston  had 
retired  from  politics  almost  as  completely  as  Jay; 
Edward  had  gone  to  Louisiana;  Brockholst  was  getting 
ready  to  go  upon  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States;  and  Maturin  was  a  negligible  factor. 
As  for  the  relatives  by  marriage,  John  Armstrong  had 
taken  Robert  R.  Livingston's  place  in  France;  Smith 
Thompson  was  unwilling  to  take  any  part  in  party  or 
factional  fights;  and  Dr.  Tillotson  had  no  capacity  for 
leadership  or  the  exertion  of  material  influence.  As 
for  Lewis  himself,  his  capacity  for  leadership  was 
equally  slight. 

DeWitt  Clinton,  on  the  other  hand,  erred  in  impa- 
tience. He  had  only  to  sit  still,  and  everything  would 
have  come  to  him.  But  his  aggressive  and  imperious 
nature  would  brook  no  delay.  He  preferred  to  fight, 
even  to  force  the  fighting  when  there  was  no  need  of  it 
and  when  prudence  counselled  Fabian  tactics.  In  this 
way  he  incurred  unnecessary  animosity.  He  roused  up 
against  himself  an  opposition  which  for  a  long  time 
overcame  him.  He  established  precedents  which  in 
after  years  came  back  to  plague  him.  He  compelled 
himself  in  time  to  seek  alliances  and  bargains  which 
were  discreditable  to  him.  He  was  one  of  the  most 


266  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

forceful  and  efficient  figures  in  all  the  history  of  the 
State,  but  he  was  his  own  worst  enemy  through  his 
arrogance  and  intolerance. 

The  Twenty-ninth  Legislature  met  on  January  28, 
1806,  and  Dr.  Alexander  Sheldon  was  again  chosen 
Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  In  his  address  the  Governor 
dwelt  first  upon  the  threatening  aspect  of  the  foreign 
affairs  of  the  nation  and  the  urgent  need  of  additional 
preparations  for  defense,  both  in  coast  and  harbor 
fortifications  and  in  improvement  of  the  militia  system. 
Under  the  lead  of  a  Senate  committee  of  which  DeWitt 
Clinton  was  chairman  the  Legislature  promptly 
responded  by  appropriating  $62,000,  with  which  the 
Governor  should  purchase  ordnance  and  supplies. 
Attention  was  also  paid  in  the  address  to  public  health, 
reform  of  the  criminal  law  relating  to  murder  and 
manslaughter,  the  maintenance  of  the  botanic  garden  of 
Dr.  David  Hosack — which  afterward  became  the 
foundation  of  the  wealth  of  Columbia  College  and  Uni- 
versity,— and  the  desirability  of  enacting  general  laws 
for  the  incorporation  of  companies  and  societies  so  as 
to  avoid  the  multiplicity  of  private  acts  which  were 
encumbering  the  statute  books. 

Much  amusement  was  afforded  to  the  journalistic 
and  other  wits  of  the  day  by  the  Governor's  well  mean- 
ing but  naive  and  over-solemn  discussion  of  the  need  of 
drummers  as  a  part  of  the  military  equipment  of  the 
State.  Apparently  this  was,  to  him,  one  of  the  most 
pressing  issues  of  the  day.  "The  drum,"  he  said,  "is  all 
important  in  the  day  of  battle.  It  may  decide  the  fate 
of  an  army."  Therefore  he  earnestly  recommended  the 


1806]  THE  NEW  ERA  267 

adoption  of  measures  to  "insure  a  competent  number  of 
persons  skilled  in  the  martial  exercise  of  that  instru- 
ment" 

When,  early  in  the  session,  the  Assembly  elected  a 
new  Council  of  Appointment,  a  "new  departure"  was 
established,  over  which  a  sharp  controversy  arose 
between  the  friends  of  the  Governor  and  the  partisans 
of  DeWitt  Clinton.  Thitherto  it  had  been  the  rule  for 
a  member  of  the  Council  for  each  district  of  the  State 
to  be  selected  by  the  members  of  Assembly  from  that 
district.  But  at  this  time  DeWitt  Clinton  was  doubtful 
of  the  support  of  the  members  of  Assembly  from  his 
own  district,  the  Southern,  while  he  was  sure  of  the 
support  of  the  Assembly  as  a  whole.  He  therefore  had 
the  four  members  of  the  Council  selected  by  a  general 
caucus  of  all  the  Democratic  members  of  Assembly, 
with  the  result  that  he  himself  was  chosen  from  the 
Southern  district,  with  Robert  Johnson  from  the 
Middle,  Adam  Comstock  from  the  Eastern,  and  Henry 
Huntington  from  the  Western.  This  gave  great  dissat- 
isfaction to  the  Governor  and  his  friends,  who  saw  in  it 
the  complete  control  of  State  patronage  by  DeWitt 
Clinton.  That  was  of  course  the  purpose  of  the  proce- 
dure, and  the  effect  was  soon  made  manifest.  When  the 
new  Council  met  on  March  26,  the  work  of  making 
another  "clean  sweep"  of  the  offices  was  undertaken. 
Maturin  Livingston  was  removed  from  the  New  York 
Recordership  and  was  replaced  by  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck. 
This  was  a  change  for  the  better,  since  Livingston  had 
never  been  fit  for  the  place;  but  it  was  not  so  much 
because  he  was  unfit  as  because  he  was  a  Livingston, 


268  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1806 


which  family  Clinton  was  determined  to  expel  from 
power  and  office.  Next,  Thomas  Tillotson,  a  brother- 
in-law  of  the  Livingstons,  was  removed  from  the  office 
of  Secretary  of  State,  and  Elisha  Jenkins  was  put  into 
his  place.  For  this  change  there  was  no  possible  reason 
save  that  of  Clinton's  hostility  to  the  Livingstons. 
Archibald  Mclntyre,  a  partisan  of  Clinton's  but  a  most 
excellent  public  servant,  was  made  Comptroller  in 
Jenkins's  place. 

Following  these  major  changes,  the  Council  pro- 
ceeded to  fill  the  minor  offices  throughout  the  State,  so 
far  as  possible,  with  friends  of  Clinton  and  enemies  of 
the  Governor.  County  officers,  such  as  Judges,  Clerks, 
Sheriffs,  and  Surrogates,  and  Justices  of  the  Peace,  were 
all  chosen  on  factional  grounds.  Against  this  the  Gov- 
ernor protested,  and  he  was  supported  in  his  protest  by 
Mr.  Huntington,  who,  though  a  friend  and  partisan  of 
Clinton's,  was  opposed  to  the  spoils  system.  But  such 
opposition  was  in  vain.  Clinton,  Johnson,  and  Comstock 
formed  a  majority  of  the  Council,  and  under  the  rule 
which  Clinton  had  secured  from  the  Constitutional 
convention  of  1801  they  were  able  to  make  and  to  con- 
firm appointments  over  the  head  of  the  Governor  and 
his  one  supporter.  It  was  a  further  step  in  that  spoils 
system  in  which  New  York  was  at  that  time  almost 
unique  among  the  States  of  this  Union. 

While  these  things  were  being  done  by  the  Council 
of  Appointment,  Clinton's  war  against  Lewis  and  the 
Livingstons  was  also  waged  in  the  Legislature.  On  the 
motion  of  Clinton's  close  friend,  Richard  Riker,  of 
New  York,  a  bill  was  introduced  and  enacted  making 


1806]  THE  NEW  ERA  269 

it  a  crime  punishable  with  heavy  fine  and  imprison- 
ment for  anybody  to  promise,  offer,  or  give  to  any  mem- 
ber of  either  house  of  the  Legislature  money,  goods,  or 
other  consideration  for  the  influencing  of  his  vote,  and 
making  it  also  a  high  misdemeanor  similarly  punish- 
able for  any  member  to  accept  such  consideration. 
There  can  be  no  question  that  this  was  an  entirely 
proper  and  desirable  law.  Neither,  however,  can 
there  be  any  question  that  it  was  suggested  by  the 
charges  of  bribery  in  connection  with  the  Merchants' 
Bank  charter,  and  that  it  was  adopted  not  merely 
through  legitimate  and  laudable  detestation  of  bribery 
but  also,  and  perhaps  more  directly,  in  order  to  fasten 
odium  upon  the  Governor's  friends  and  even  upon  the 
Governor  himself,  though  of  course  there  was  no 
thought  that  he  had  been  implicated  in  the  corruption. 
Clinton  himself  introduced  a  resolution  into  the  State 
Senate  providing  for  the  expulsion  of  Ebenezer  Purdy, 
on  the  ground  that  he  had  accepted  a  bribe  from  the 
Merchants'  Bank  people  and  had  in  turn  tried  to  bribe 
others.  There  was  no  doubt  of  the  passage  of  the 
resolution  or  of  the  expulsion  of  the  offending 
Senator.  But  Purdy  forestalled  such  action  by 
resigning  his  seat  before  the  resolution  could  be 
adopted.  He  was  apparently  permitted  to  resign 
without  opposition,  and  as  the  bill  for  the  punishment 
of  bribery  had  not  yet  been  enacted  he  was  perforce 
permitted  to  go  unscathed  for  his  gross  misdemeanor. 
It  was  impossible  to  regard  him  as  as  innocent  victim 
of  partisan  persecution.  His  guilt  was  seriously 
doubted  by  nobody.  Yet  in  the  exacerbated  state  of 


270  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1806 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

factional  sentiment  his  practically  enforced  retirement 
from  the  Senate  was  looked  upon  not  so  much  as  a 
purging  of  that  body  of  unworthy  membership  as  just 
another  stroke  in  the  battle  between  Clinton  and  Lewis. 

The  Legislature  adjourned  without  day  on  April  7, 
and  the  battle  was  then  transferred  to  the  hustings. 
Both  sides  prepared  for  a  vigorous  battle  at  the  April 
elections.  Had  the  contest  remained  between  the  two 
factions  of  the  Democratic  party,  it  is  quite  probable 
that  Clinton  would  have  won.  Despite  his  faults  of 
temperament,  he  was  a  far  more  forceful,  adroit,  and 
resourceful  party  leader  than  Lewis  or  any  other  man 
on  the  Livingstonian  side.  But  it  did  not  thus  remain. 
The  Federalists  took  a  hand  in  it.  They  had  thus  far 
held  aloof,  quite  willing  for  the  two  Democratic 
factions  to  fight  and  if  possible  to  destroy  each  other. 
But  in  the  elections  they  determined  to  give  active  sup- 
port to  Lewis.  They  had  no  hope  of  winning  with  their 
own  candidates,  wherefore  they  would  aid  Lewis's. 
That  was  because  they  saw  in  Lewis  a  much  weaker 
leader  than  Clinton,  and  therefore  one  more  easily  to  be 
overthrown.  If  they  could  beat  Clinton  with  Lewis 
they  might  in  turn  overthrow  Lewis,  while  if  Clinton 
should  win  they  would  have  little  hope  of  dislodging 
him  from  power. 

In  counties  where  they  felt  sure  of  success  with  their 
own  candidates,  therefore,  they  supported  such  candi- 
dates and  succeeded  in  electing  a  considerable  number 
of  them.  Elsewhere,  they  cast  their  votes  for  the 
friends  of  Lewis.  This  was  a  plan  of  campaign  which 
became  characteristic  of  New  York  politics,  and  which 


1806]  THE  NEW  ERA  271 

has  frequently  been  pursued  even  down  to  the  present 
time.  In  1806  it  was  successful.  Clinton  indeed 
secured  a  small  majority  of  the  Democratic  members. 
But  a  fusion  of  Lewis's  friends  and  the  Federalists 
formed  a  majority  of  the  Legislature.  In  this  campaign 
the  most  efficient  leader  of  the  Federalists  was  William 
W.  Van  Ness,  a  cousin  of  the  William  P.  Van  Ness 
who  had  been  Burr's  closest  friend — a  man  of  much 
ability  and  of  consummate  shrewdness  in  practical 
politics,  as  well  as  of  exceptional  social  charm  and 
"personal  magnetism." 

After  the  State  elections  the  two  factions  rested  on 
their  arms  for  a  time,  anticipating  the  renewal  of  the 
war  in  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature.  Meanwhile, 
however,  some  vigorous  local  operations  occurred  in 
New  York  City.  Although  this  was  DeWitt  Clinton's 
home,  it  also  was  the  home  of  his  most  implacable  and 
efficient  foes,  and  the  latter  were  in  the  Democratic 
party  almost  as  numerous  as  his  friends.  It  was  here 
that  the  cooperation,  alliance,  or  fusion  between  the 
Federalists  and  Lewis's  faction  of  the  Democracy  was 
most  marked  and  most  successful.  The  result  was  that 
this  fusion  gained  control  of  the  Common  Council  of 
the  city  by  a  substantial  majority,  and  forthwith  pro- 
ceeded to  effect  another  "clean  sweep,"  turning  out  of 
office  every  friend  of  Clinton,  from  the  City  Comp- 
troller down,  and  putting  in  their  places  friends  of 
Lewis  and  Federalists.  There  was  no  pretense  that  this 
was  done  for  any  other  than  partisan  reasons. 

It  was  during  these  campaigns  of  1806  that  Lewis's 
faction  of  the  Democracy  obtained  the  popular  name 


272  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1807 


of  "Quids."  The  origin  of  this  appellation  has  been 
variously  ascribed,  but  it  appears  to  have  arisen  from  a 
curious  exercise  of  the  fondness  for  classicism  which 
then  prevailed.  It  will  be  recalled  that  writers  for  the 
press  almost  invariably  used  classic  names  for  their 
pseudonyms,  such  as  "Aristides,"  "Marcus,"  and  what 
not.  So  the  Clintonians  insisted  that  they  were  the  only 
real  Democratic  party,  the  Federalists  were  the  other 
major  party,  and  the  followers  of  Lewis  and  the  Living- 
stons were  only  a  third  party  or,  in  Latin,  "Tertium 
Quid."  This  was  popularly  shortened  into  "Quid"  or 
"Quids." 

The  Thirtieth  Legislature  met  on  January  27,  1807. 
During  the  months  preceding  the  various  party  leaders 
had  been  busily  engaged  in  preparing  for  the  fray 
which  was  certain  to  ensue,  with  a  resolution  to  make 
it  a  battle  to  the  death.  Clinton  controlled  a  majority 
of  the  Democrats,  but  a  fusion  of  the  Quids  and 
Federalists — of  which  latter  there  were  eighteen  in  the 
Assembly — would  form  a  majority  of  the  whole  Legis- 
lature. Care  was  taken,  through  promise  of  patronage, 
to  make  this  fusion  effective,  as  indeed  it  proved  to  be. 
The  first  test  of  strength  arose  over  the  election  of  the 
Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  Dr.  Sheldon,  Clintonian, 
was  a  candidate  for  reelection,  but  he  was  opposed  by 
Andrew  McCord,  of  Orange  county,  a  Quid;  and  the 
latter  was  elected  by  a  majority  of  eleven  votes.  There 
was  a  like  contest  over  the  Clerkship.  The  brilliant  and 
popular  Mr.  Southwick  was  a  candidate  for  reelection, 
and  at  first  seemed  certain  of  success.  Everybody  liked 
him,  and  he  merited  such  regard  because  of  his  talents 


SMITH  THOMPSON' 

Smith  Thompson,  jurist,  born  in  Stanford,  \.  Y.,  January 
17,  1768;  lawyer;  member  of  legislature,  1800;  delegate  to 
constitutional  convention,  1801;  justice  supreme  court,  1804-14; 
chief  justice,  1814-19;  secretary  of  the  navy  under  President 
Monroe;  justice  United  States  supreme  court,  1823;  died  at 
Poughkeepsie,  December  18,  1843. 


1807]  THE  NEW  ERA  273 

and  his  cordial  and  amiable  disposition.  As  Clerk  for 
three  sessions  he  had  been  equally  courteous  and  gen- 
erous to  friend  and  foe.  Nevertheless,  he  was  a  friend 
of  DeWitt  Clinton,  and  that  was  enough  to  doom  him. 
He  was  beaten  by  the  narrow  majority  of  six  votes  by 
Garret  Y.  Lansing,  a  nephew  of  the  Chancellor,  John 
Lansing,  and  one  of  the  bitterest  foes  of  Clinton  in  all 
the  State. 

Governor  Lewis,  apparently  thinking  that  there 
would  be  enough  politics  in  the  session  without  his 
injecting  any,  made  his  address,  at  the  opening,  as 
colorless  as  possible,  though  not  devoid  of  merit  as  a 
presentation  of  State  interests.  He  exulted  in  the  fact 
that  New  York  had  far  outstripped  Philadelphia  in 
commerce,  recommended  encouragement  of  agriculture 
and  the  arts  and  a  strengthening  of  the  common  schools, 
suggested  some  reforms  in  jurisprudence,  dwelt  at 
length  upon  the  importance  of  the  militia,  which  seems 
to  have  been  his  pet  hobby,  and  called  attention  to  a 
boundary  dispute  with  the  State  of  New  Jersey.  "I 
have  been  an  eye-witness,"  he  said,  "to  the  state  of  the 
militia;  I  have  personally  inspected  nearly  the  whole, 
and  I  can  with  truth  assert  to  you  that  they  have  not,  as 
I  verily  believe,  of  such  arms  as  a  soldier  ought  to  have, 
and  as  our  law  requires,  a  musket  to  every  tenth  man, 
nor  a  bayonet  to  every  twentieth ;  many  are  destitute  of 
arms  of  every  description,  and  appear  on  parade  shoul- 
dering a  staff  in  place  of  a  firelock.  .  .  .  Nor  is  the 
deficiency  in  arms  greater  than  that  in  colors  and 
martial  music." 


274  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1807 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

It  was  impossible,  however,  that  the  Governor  should 
avoid  making  some  reference  to  the  current  political 
strife,  and  he  did  so  on  February  1 1  in  his  reply  to  the 
Assembly's  address  in  response  to  his  own.  He  declared 
that  he  had  been  "obliged  to  combat  the  prejudices  of 
some,  the  jealousies  of  others,  and  the  passions  of  all 
whom  interest  or  ambition  may  excite."  If  even  Wash- 
ington, even  after  his  death,  and  Jefferson,  had  not 
escaped  odious  aspersions,  "it  were  vanity  consummate 
for  one  far  inferior  to  either  to  hope  for  universal 
approbation."  "Sensible  of  my  own  imperfections," 
he  continued,  "I  am  willing  to  believe  I  may  have  com- 
mitted errors,  but  I  had  fondly  hoped  they  were  such, 
if  any,  as  merited  indulgence  rather  than  asperity.  Con- 
scious that,  to  the  extent  of  my  ability,  the  public  good 
has  been  the  leading  object  of  my  career,  I  have  sub- 
mitted to  obloquy  with  no  little  resignation.  The 
approving  voice  of  the  immediate  representatives  of  my 
fellow-citizens  is,  however,  an  ample  recompense,  and 
affords  a  gratification  which  can  only  be  expressed  in 
acknowledgments  of  your  liberality  and  candor."  From 
this  it  is  obvious  that  the  Assembly's  address  had  been 
dictated  by  the  combination  of  Quids  and  Federalists. 

On  the  second  day  of  the  session  the  Assembly  elected 
a  new  Council  of  Appointment.  Clinton  discreetly 
avoided  being  a  candidate  for  reelection,  discerning 
defeat  for  his  faction.  The  result  was  the  election  of 
Thomas  Thomas,  James  Burt,  Edward  Savage,  and 
John  Nicholas,  all  opponents  of  Clinton,  and  imme- 
diately thereafter  the  spoils  machine  was  set  to  work,  its 
efficiency  heightened  by  the  element  of  ruthless  revenge. 


1807]  THE  NEW  ERA  275 

The  first  act  was  to  remove  DeWitt  Clinton  from  the 
Mayoralty  of  New  York,  and  to  appoint  in  his  place 
Smith  Thompson,  then  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
and  a  brother-in-law  of  the  Livingstons.  Mr.  Thomp- 
son, having  no  love  for  politics,  declined  the  appoint- 
ment, whereupon  Colonel  Marinus  Wfllett,  who  had 
been  one  of  Burr's  foremost  supporters,  was  named  in 
his  place.  A  little  later  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck  was 
removed  from  the  Recordership  of  New  York  and 
Maturin  Livingston  was  restored  to  the  office;  and  in 
like  manner  Mr.  Jenkins  was  removed  from  and  Dr. 
Tillotson  was  restored  to  the  office  of  Secretary  of 
State.  Teunis  Wortman  was  removed  from  the  City 
Clerk's  office  to  make  room  for  Thomas  Morris,  a 
prominent  Federalist.  Isaac  Kibbe,  who  had  been  an 
ardent  follower  of  Burr,  was  made  Harbor  Master  at 
New  York,  but  seems  to  have  been  an  unfortunate 
choice  for  the  fusionists,  since  he  afterward  became  a 
zealous  lobbyist  in  Clinton's  interest.  Wherever  it  was 
possible  the  Quids  and  Federalists  reversed  the  work 
which  the  Clintonians  had  done  a  year  before,  using 
public  offices,  great  and  small,  as  sheer  spoils  of  victory 
in  cynical  disregard  of  merit  and  of  public  service. 
The  Legislature  adjourned  without  day  on  April  7, 
leaving  the  further  prosecution  of  the  political  war  to 
the  people  at  the  polls,  when  a  new  Governor  and 
Legislature  were  to  be  chosen. 

It  had  been  the  custom  for  nominations  for  Governor 
to  be  made  by  party  caucuses  of  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature. But  in  1807  the  Clintonians  had  a  majority  of 
the  Democratic  members  and  there  was  no  hope  of 


276  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1807 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Governor  Lewis's  renomination,  which  he  desired, 
through  that  agency.  Accordingly,  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  nearly  a  month  before  the  Legislature  would 
convene,  Lewis's  friends  organized  a  popular  Demo- 
cratic convention  in  New  York  City  and  had  it  for- 
mally nominate  the  Governor  as  the  regular  Democratic 
candidate.  This  was  a  "new  departure"  and  was  much 
resented  by  the  Clintonians,  who  denied  the  right  of 
such  a  gathering  to  speak  for  the  party,  or  of  its  candi- 
date to  pose  as  the  regular  candidate  of  the  party. 
Nothing  definite  was  done,  however,  for  six  weeks  and 
more.  The  Clintonians  waited  to  see  what  course  the 
fusionists  would  pursue  in  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment 

The  moment  the  Council  removed  Clinton  from  the 
Mayoralty  of  New  York,  however,  the  die  was  cast. 
Clinton  gave  orders  that  a  candidate  should  be  put  into 
the  field  who  would  defeat  Lewis  at  all  hazards.  The 
evening  of  that  very  day,  February  6,  the  Clintonian 
members  of  the  Legislature,  being  a  majority  of  the 
Democrats,  gathered  in  the  Assembly  chamber  to 
nominate  a  candidate  for  Governor.  Their  quest  con- 
fessedly was  for  the  man  who  was  most  certain  to  defeat 
Lewis.  But  it  was  not  an  easy  one.  There  were  two 
conspicuous  candidates.  These  were  DeWitt  Clinton 
himself,  and  Ambrose  Spencer.  Logically,  one  of  them 
should  be  chosen.  But  to  both  there  was  an  insuperable 
objection.  They  were  members  of  the  Clinton  family. 
The  fight  against  Lewis  was  to  be  in  fact  a  fight  against 
the  Livingston  family,  which  was  to  be  charged  with 
filling  all  possible  offices  with  its  own  members  and 


1807]  THE  NEW  ERA  277 

retainers.  In  such  circumstances  it  would  be  fatally 
stultifying  to  put  forward  as  a  candidate  a  member  of 
the  Clinton  family,  against  which  course  a  similar 
charge  had  been  and  could  again  be  made. 

Both  Clinton  and  Spencer  were  therefore  ruled  out 
as  ineligible  under  the  rule  of  political  expediency,  and 
at  the  suggestion,  if  not  the  dictation,  of  the  former  the 
choice  of  the  caucus  fell  upon  a  man  whom  a  day  before 
nobody  had  thought  of  as  a  candidate.  This  was  Daniel 
D.  Tompkins,  a  young  man  who,  in  the  Constitutional 
convention  of  1801,  had  stood  against  the  spoilsmen's 
interpretation  of  the  powers  of  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment, who  had  been  elected  to  Congress,  and  who  had 
been  appointed  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
State,  in  which  office  his  attractive  personality  had  won 
him  a  multitude  of  friends.  It  seems  probable  that 
Clinton  underrated  his  ability  and  force  of  character, 
and  thought  him  neutral  and  pliable  and  thus  easily 
controlled — in  which  Clinton  was  grievously  mistaken. 
John  Broome  was  renominated  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor.  Sixty-five  members  of  the  Legislature  par- 
ticipated unanimously  in  making  these  nominations 
and  in  issuing  an  address  to  the  electors  of  the  State  in 
behalf  of  their  candidates,  in  which  address,  it  is  worthy 
of  note,  not  a  single  reason  based  on  principle  was  given 
why  Justice  Tompkins  should  be  preferred  to  Governor 
Lewis. 

A  few  days  later  the  Quids  in  the  Legislature,  con- 
cluding that  the  renomination  of  Lewis  by  the  New 
York  citizens'  convention  would  better  be  confirmed, 
held  a  caucus,  forty-five  strong,  renominated  the  Gov- 


278  POLITICAL  AND   GOVERNMENTAL  [1807 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ernor,  and  named  Thomas  Storm  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor.  The  Federalists  made  no  nominations  and 
committed  themselves  as  a  party  to  neither  side.  Their 
vote  was  probably  divided.  , 

An  acrimonious  campaign  ensued.  The  Quids  loudly 
proclaimed  that  Lewis's  candidacy  was  a  revolt  against 
bossism,  and  that  Clinton  had  turned  against  him  solely 
because  he  would  not  submit  to  his  dictation.  In  sup- 
port of  this  charge  the  Chancellor,  John  Lansing, 
entered  the  campaign  with  a  public  statement  of  his 
reasons  for  withdrawing  from  the  campaign  of  three 
years  before.  It  will  be  recalled  that  Lansing  was  then 
nominated  for  Governor  by  Clinton  and  his  friends,  but 
a  little  later  declined  to  stand  and  was  replaced  on  the 
ticket  by  Morgan  Lewis.  He  now  declared  that  a  few 
days  after  his  nomination  he  had  been  asked  by  the 
Clintonians  to  pledge  himself  to  a  certain  line  of  policy, 
that  he  had  refused  to  do  so,  and  that  thereupon  he  had 
been  informed  by  Dr.  Tillotson  that  DeWitt  Clinton 
had  made  unfavorable  comment  upon  him  and  had 
displayed  letters  from  a  Washington  correspondent 
charging  him  with  having  intrigued  with  Burr.  For 
these  reasons,  Lansing  said,  he  concluded  that  his  place 
as  Governor  would  be  made  very  uncomfortable  for 
him  by  the  Clintons,  and  he  decided  not  to  accept  it. 
DeWitt  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  at  once  denied  these 
statements,  and  George  Clinton,  the  Vice-President, 
wrote  from  Washington  repudiating  them  so  far  as  he 
was  concerned.  , 

Mr.  Lansing  retorted  with  further  charges.  He 
repeated  the  statement  that  George  Clinton,  then  Gov- 


1807J  THE  NEW  ERA  279 

ernor,  had  tried  to  exact  pledges  from  him  on  the 
ground  that  some  of  his  friends  were  doubtful  of  the 
Chancellor's  political  trustworthiness.  Governor 
Clinton  had  also  said  that  he  himself  was  likely  to  be 
chosen  Vice-President,  that  Mr.  Lansing,  if  he  became 
Governor,  would  have  to  retire  from  the  Chancellor- 
ship, and  that  DeWitt  Clinton  would  be  a  good  man  to 
appoint  to  the  latter  vacancy;  to  which  the  Chancellor 
had  replied  that  in  his  opinion  the  senior  judicial  officer 
should  be  promoted  to  the  Chancellorship.  DeWitt 
Clinton  replied  to  this  with  a  heated  denial  that  he  had 
ever  aspired  to  the  Chancellorship,  and  further 
correspondence  increased  the  bitterness  of  the  dispute 
without  getting  any  nearer  to  a  settlement. 

The  result  of  the  election  was  closer  than  that  of  three 
years  before,  but  it  was  a  sufficiently  decisive  defeat  for 
Lewis.  The  vote  was  35,074  for  Tompkins  and  30,989 
for  Lewis.  The  Clintonians  won  the  Legislature  by  a 
considerable  margin. 

One  more  battle  over  appointments  remained  to  be 
fought  during  Governor  Lewis's  administration. 
Brockholst  Livingston  had  been  promoted  from  the 
Supreme  Court  of  New  York  to  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States,  and  a  successor  to  him  must  be 
chosen.  The  Council  of  Appointment  was  much 
divided  in  opinion,  one  favoring  Jonas  Platt,  another 
John  Woodworth,  a  third  Maturin  Livingston,  and 
the  fourth  William  W.  Van  Ness,  the  brilliant  young 
Federalist  leader  whom  the  Clintonians  had  charged 
the  fusionists  with  intending  to  appoint  as  Attorney- 


280  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1807 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

General.  It  was  finally  decided  to  postpone  the 
appointment  until  after  the  election,  for  reasons  of 
political  strategy. 

Three  weeks  before  the  end  of  his  administration,  on 
June  9,  Governor  Lewis  called  the  Council  together 
to  make  the  appointment.  He  was  himself  inclined  to 
favor  his  relative,  Maturin  Livingston,  but  he  could 
not  persuade  the  majority  of  the  Council  to  commit 
such  a  folly.  After  much  maneuvering  and  intriguing 
the  choice  fell  upon  Van  Ness,  who  was  then  only 
thirty-one  years  old,  one  of  the  youngest  men  who 
ever  held  such  a  position. 


CHAPTER  XIII 
A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE" 

DR.  JABEZ  D.  HAMMOND,  in  his  unique  and 
incomparable  "Political  History  of  the  State  of 
New  York,"  with  an  apt  touch  of  the  classicism 
which  had  been  so  dear  to  writers  and  speakers  in 
earlier  years  and  which  was  still  much  cherished  in  his 
time,  suggests  a  parallel  between  the  story  of  the  three 
great  factions  of  New  York  and  that  of  the  Roman 
Triumvirs,  in  which  Burr  plays  the  part  of  Lepidus, 
the  Livingstons  that  of  Antonius,  and  the  Clintons  that 
of  Augustus.  The  likeness  is  interesting.  Antonius 
Livingstons  and  Augustus  Clintons  united  to  destroy 
Lepidus  Burr,  with  no  love  for  each  other  save  in  their 
common  enmity  to  him ;  and  then  the  Augustus  Clintons 
in  turn  destroyed  the  Antonius  Livingstons  and 
reigned,  as  they  fondly  thought,  supreme.  There,  how- 
ever, the  parallel  ends  and  a  great  contrast  begins. 
For  Augustus  Caesar  vanquished  Antonius  by  his  own 
leadership  and  mastery,  and  thereafter  reigned  unchal- 
lenged. But  the  Clintons,  or,  rather,  DeWitt  Clinton, 
who  had  become  the  real  head  of  the  house,  overthrew 
the  Livingstons  through  the  agency  of  Daniel  D.  Tomp- 
kins  and  thereby  raised  up  against  himself  a  far  more 
formidable  opponent  than  any  he  had  destroyed.  He 
imagined  that  in  Mr.  Tompkins  he  would  have  a  facile 
and  subservient  tool.  Instead,  he  found  for  years  his 
master. 

281 


282  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [iso7 


In  this  incident  DeWitt  Clinton  made  the  second  of 
the  major  errors  of  his  distinguished  career.  The  first 
had  been  his  injection  of  the  spoils  system  into  the 
operations  of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  which,  as 
we  have  seen  and  still  shall  see,  reacted  against  himself 
with  disastrous  force.  Now  he  reckoned  that  as  a  party 
"boss"  he  could  control  as  puppets  those  whom  the  party 
elected  to  office.  From  these  two  infirmities  of  a  noble 
mind  date  the  twin  systems  of  bossism  and  spoils  which 
for  a  century  thereafter  dominated  the  politics  of  New 
York. 

This  second  blunder  of  Clinton's  was  not  only  an 
error  in  morals  but  also  a  grievous  misjudgment  of  men, 
or  of  a  man.  It  seems  at  this  distance  almost  incredible 
that  he  should  have  supposed  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  to 
be  a  man  who  could  be  bent  to  the  will  of  any  other; 
for,  young  as  he  was,  Mr.  Tompkins  had  on  more  than 
one  occasion  shown  the  possession  of  singular  independ- 
ence and  resolution,  inherited  from  his  father,  one  of 
the  most  indomitable  spirits — albeit  in  a  humble  sphere 
—of  the  Revolution;  and,  amiable  and  urbane  as  he 
was,  he  had  made  it  known  that  within  the  glove  of 
velvet  there  was  a  hand  of  steel.  The  sequel  was  that 
the  election  and  accession  of  Governor  Tompkins 
marked  the  beginning  of  DeWitt  Clinton's  greatest 
fight  for  political  life. 

It  will  be  well  to  fix  in  mind  a  picture  of  the  two 
great  rivals,  antagonists  in  perhaps  on  the  whole  the 
greatest  political  duel  in  the  history  of  the  State. 
Genealogically  they  were  contrasted,  Clinton  having 
"claims  of  long  descent"  from  the  aristocracy  not  only 


1807]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  283 

of  the  State  and  Colony,  but  of  the  old  country,  while 
Tompkins,  son  of  a  modest  farmer,  was  essentially  a 
"man  of  the  people."  Physically,  Clinton  was  of 
medium  stature  but  of  unusual  breadth  of  shoulder, 
somewhat  saturnine  of  countenance,  beetle-browed, 
with  balefire  eyes  and  bulldog  chin,  the  face  of  an 
autocrat  and  a  fighter.  Tompkins  was  much  above  the 
usual  height,  his  figure  a  compound  of  Hercules  and 
Antinous,  his  face  singularly  handsome,  open,  winning 
in  its  smiling  grace.  Both  faces  were  true  indices  of 
temperament.  Clinton  could  doubtless  be  most  agree- 
able to  his  friends,  but  to  strangers  he  was  reserved  if 
not  actually  repellant.  Tompkins  was  always  affable, 
genial,  and  inviting,  though  never  lacking  in  dignity. 
Clinton,  we  may  assume,  self-centered  in  arrogant 
pride,  imagined  severity  such  as  his  own  to  be  indis- 
pensable to  strength,  and  therefore  mistook  Tompkins's 
geniality  for  weakness — a  fatal  error  of  estimate. 

The  stage  setting  of  the  drama  was  worthy  of  the  two 
protagonists.  Another  war  was  obviously  impending. 
The  tragedy  of  the  "Chesapeake"  had  occurred,  throw- 
ing the  country,  as  Jefferson  said,  into  such  a  state  of 
excitement  as  it  had  not  known  since  Lexington.  It  was 
on  the  very  day  of  Governor  Tompkins's  inauguration 
that  the  stricken  ship  made  her  way  back  into  Norfolk 
harbor.  There  quickly  followed  the  British  orders  in 
council  and  Napoleon's  Milan  decree,  and  then  the 
embargo.  Of  course  the  embargo  was  a  great  hard- 
ship to  the  commerce  of  New  York,  and  on  that  account 
DeWitt  Clinton  instantly  and  impulsively  condemned 
it,  and  his  uncle,  the  Vice-President,  followed  his 


284  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1808 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

example,  writing  and  speaking  against  Jefferson's 
policy  with  results  disastrous  to  himself,  as  we  shall 
see.  Cheetham,  editor  of  Clinton's  American  Citizen 
newspaper,  of  course  trained  against  the  embargo  the 
bitterest  batteries  of  his  aggressive  pen. 

Such  was  the  situation  when,  on  January  26,  1808, 
the  Thirty-first  Legislature  assembled  at  Albany,  with 
an  overwhelming  Democratic  majority.  Dr.  Alexander 
Sheldon  was  reflected  Speaker  of  the  Assembly. 
Daniel  Rodman  was  elected  Clerk  of  the  Assembly  over 
G.  Y.  Lansing,  the  former  Clerk,  by  a  vote  of  sixty  to 
twenty-one,  that  division  indicating  the  respective 
strengths  of  the  two  parties. 

The  Governor's  address  was  practically  a  declaration 
of  war  between  him  and  DeWitt  Clinton.  It  began  with 
a  detailed  and  forceful  consideration  of  the  "Chesa- 
peake" incident  and  the  embargo,  and  in  respect  to  the 
latter  it  directly  antagonized  the  attitude  to  which 
Clinton  had  committed  himself.  Recognizing  the  great 
hardships  of  the  embargo,  the  Governor  argued  that  it 
was  yet  a  patriotic  duty  to  endure  them  as  a  temporary 
expedient  in  order  to  avert,  if  possible,  something 
worse,  namely,  embroilment  in  the  European  war. 
Realizing,  however,  the  danger  of  hostilities  in  spite 
of  this  immeasurable  sacrifice  to  avoid  them,  the  Gov- 
ernor urged  prompt  and  generous  cooperation  with  the 
Federal  government  for  the  better  defense  of  the  city 
and  port  of  New  York,  and  also  for  the  defense  of  the 
northern  and  western  frontiers  of  the  State;  to  which 
appeal  the  Legislature  responded  with  appropriations 
for  those  purposes,  for  the  construction  of  a  powder 


1808]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  285 

magazine  and  an  arsenal  in  New  York,  and  for  the  pur- 
chase of  ordnance,  arms,  and  ammunition.  The  Gov- 
ernor announced  that  the  State's  quota  of  100,000  men 
in  the  organized  militia  had  been  completed,  and  that 
thousands  more  had  offered  themselves  for  the  service. 
The  more  adequate  compensation  of  Judges  and  the 
encouragement  of  agriculture,  the  arts,  and  popular 
education  were  the  concluding  topics  of  an  eminently 
statesmanlike  address. 

The  sentiments  of  the  address  with  respect  to  the 
embargo  were  received  by  the  Legislature  with 
approval  so  cordial  that  even  Clinton  could  not  venture 
to  dissent.  Accordingly,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  he 
reversed  his  attitude  and  gave  to  the  embargo  a  sup- 
port as  hearty  as  his  opposition  had  been  severe.  This 
he  did,  apparently,  without  consulting  or  even  warning 
either  his  uncle,  the  Vice-President,  or  his  loyal  editor, 
Cheetham,  leaving  them  to  follow  him  with  the  best 
grace  they  could.  It  was  not  at  all  surprising  that 
Cheetham  resented  what  he  considered  betrayal  by  the 
leader  whom  he  had  faithfully  served,  thinking  that 
Clinton  might  at  least  have  taken  him  into  his  confi- 
dence in  the  matter.  He  showed  his  resentment  by 
practically  breaking  with  Clinton  and  persisting  in 
opposition  to  the  embargo,  thus  aligning  himself  with 
the  Federalists  against  the  Jefferson  administration. 

For  a  time,  in  the  matter  of  appointments,  Clinton 
seemed  to  be  triumphant.  A  new  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment was  elected,  consisting  of  Benjamin  Coe  from  the 
Southern  district,  Peter  C.  Adams  from  the  Middle, 
John  Veeder  from  the  Eastern,  and  Nathan  Smith  from 


286  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1808 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Western  district;  and  it  promptly  set  to  work  to 
turn  out  the  Livingstonians  and  to  fill  their  places  with 
Clintonians.  First  of  all  DeWitt  Clinton  was  restored 
to  his  place  as  Mayor  of  New  York  in  place  of  Marinus 
Willett.  Then  Elisha  Jenkins  was  made  Secretary  of 
State  in  place  of  Dr.  Tillotson,  and  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck 
was  made  Recorder  in  New  York  in  place  of  Maturin 
Livingston.  Sylvanus  Miller  was  restored  to  the  Sur- 
rogateship  in  New  York  in  place  of  Ogden  Edwards. 
Many  other  such  changes  were  made  on  the  very  first 
day  of  the  Council's  meeting.  Joseph  C.  Yates,  sup- 
ported by  Clinton,  was  appointed  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  to  fill  the  place  formerly  filled  by  Gov- 
ernor Tompkins.  Matthias  B.  Hildreth  was  made 
Attorney-General  in  place  of  John  Woodworth,  who 
had  been  a  supporter  of  Governor  Lewis.  It  should 
also  be  noted  that  on  March  20  Martin  Van  Buren  was 
appointed  Surrogate  of  Columbia  county,  thus  making 
his  first  appearance  in  the  public  life  in  which  he  was 
destined  to  be  so  prominent  a  figure.  Throughout  the 
State  there  was  made  a  pretty  "clean  sweep"  of  all 
officials  who  were  not  approved  by  Clinton.  The  Legis- 
lature also  applied  the  same  rule  to  the  one  State  office 
under  its  control.  It  removed  Abraham  G.  Lansing,  a 
most  estimable  official,  from  the  office  of  State  Treas- 
urer, and  filled  his  place  with  David  Thomas,  formerly 
a  Representative  in  Congress. 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Governor  Tompkins 
disapproved  this  indiscriminate  spoilsmanship.  But 
he  realized  the  futility  of  attempting  to  check  it.  He 
had  in  the  Constitutional  convention  manfully  opposed 


1808]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  287 

the  pernicious  interpretation  of  the  powers  of  the 
Council  of  Appointment  upon  which  Clinton  had 
insisted,  but  he  had  been  defeated  in  that  stand  and 
there  was  no  recourse  but  to  acquiesce  in  the  result  and 
bide  his  time. 

The  Legislature  at  this  session  received  through  the 
Governor  a  message  from  President  Jefferson  dated 
December  10,  1807,  in  reply  to  an  address  which  the 
preceding  Legislature  had  sent  to  him  on  March  13, 
1807.  The  Legislature  had  urged  him  to  be  a  candidate 
for  a  third  term  in  the  Presidency,  and  his  reply  was  a 
statement  of  his  reasons  for  declining  to  do  so.  "That  I 
should  lay  down  my  charge  at  a  proper  period,"  he 
wrote,  "is  as  much  a  duty  as  to  have  borne  it  faithfully." 
Referring  to  the  danger  that  a  too  protracted  tenure  of 
office  might  degenerate  into  an  inheritance,  he  added: 
"I  should  unwillingly  be  the  person  who,  disregarding 
the  sound  precedent  set  by  an  illustrious  predecessor, 
should  furnish  the  first  example  of  prolongation  beyond 
the  second  term  of  office." 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  April  11,  after  direct- 
ing that  its  successor  should  meet  on  November  1 
following  to  appoint  Presidential  Electors.  The  spring 
elections  followed,  and  in  the  campaign  the  foremost 
issue  was  the  purely  national  question  of  the  embargo. 
On  this  the  Federalists  rallied  in  increased  strength  and 
made  some  gains  in  the  Legislature,  though  the  Demo- 
crats retained  a  strong  majority. 

Meantime  a  greater  game  of  politics  was  being 
played  than  that  of  the  State  election.  A  new  President 
of  the  United  States  was  to  be  chosen,  to  replace  Thomas 


288  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1808 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Jefferson  on  March  4,  1809,  and  it  had  long  been 
planned  and  confidently  expected  by  the  Clintonians 
that  George  Clinton  would  be  the  man.  Apparently 
the  succession  of  the  Vice-President  had  been  estab- 
lished as  an  unwritten  precedent.  Adams  had  succeeded 
Washington,  and  Jefferson  had  succeeded  Adams. 
Therefore  Clinton  should  succeed  Jefferson.  For 
months  DeWitt  Clinton  publicly  urged  such  promotion 
of  his  uncle.  Unluckily,  he  did  so  not  alone  on  the 
ground  of  precedent  but  also  on  that  of  opposition  to 
the  "Virginia  dynasty."  He  pointed  out  that  Virginia 
had  had  two  of  the  three  Presidents  and  had  filled  the 
office  for  sixteen  years  out  of  twenty,  and  urged  that  it 
was  time  that  New  York,  by  this  time  second  to  only 
Virginia  in  population,  and  a  very  close  second,  should 
supply  a  President. 

Such  tactics  on  DeWitt  Clinton's  part  aroused  hos- 
tility in  Virginia  and  assured  the  defeat  of  his  uncle. 
A  year  or  two  before  attention  had  been  called  by  a 
writer  in  the  Enquirer  of  Richmond,  Virginia,  to  the 
growing  power  and  apparently  boundless  ambition  of 
DeWitt  Clinton,  who  was  a  State  Senator,  member  of 
the  Council  of  Appointment,  and  Mayor  of  New  York, 
and  it  was  suggested  that  his  influence  in  national 
politics  should  be  combated.  Those  circumstances 
were  now  recalled,  and  in  addition  it  was  recalled  that 
both  George  Clinton  and  DeWitt  Clinton  had  at  first 
condemned  Jefferson's  embargo  policy.  It  was  there- 
fore determined  to  break  the  precedent.  The  usual 
caucus  of  Democratic  members  of  Congress  was  called, 
to  nominate  a  candidate,  but  it  was  called  in  a  some- 


DANIEL  D.  TOMPKINS 

Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  5th  governor,  1807-17;  born  in  West- 
chester  county,  N.  Y.,  June  21,  1774;  lawyer;  delegate  con- 
stitutional convention,  1801;  member  of  assembly;  justice  su- 
preme court;  resigned,  June  9,  1807  when  elected  governor; 
elected  vice-president  United  States,  1816;  reflected  vice-presi- 
dent, 1820;  died  on  Staten  Island,  June  11,  1825. 


1808]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  289 

what  unusual  way,  hastily  and  without  the  knowledge 
of  the  Vice-President.  At  this  caucus  James  Madison 
was  nominated  for  President  and  George  Clinton  was 
again  named  for  Vice-President. 

This  gave  great  umbrage  to  Clinton  and  his  friends, 
and  also  to  James  Monroe  and  his  friends,  he  having 
cherished  an  ambition  to  be  a  candidate,  and  they  went 
so  far  as  to  try  to  impeach  the  regularity  of  the  caucus 
on  the  ground  that  it  had  been  attended  by  only  89  of 
the  139  Democratic  members  of  Congress.  Still, 
George  Clinton  did  not  refuse  to  let  his  name  stand  as 
the  Vice-Presidential  candidate.  For  a  time  DeWitt 
Clinton  seems  to  have  meditated  a  fusion  with  the 
Federalists,  who  were  in  a  receptive  mood  for  such  an 
arrangement.  Had  there  been  a  combination  of  the 
followers  of  Clinton  and  Monroe  and  the  Federalists, 
upon  a  good  candidate,  it  would  probably  have  been 
successful  and  Madison  would  have  been  beaten.  But 
while  the  Federalists  waited  the  dissenting  Democratic 
factions  wrangled.  The  supporters  of  Clinton  looked 
askant  at  Monroe  because  he  was  a  Virginian,  and 
Monroe's  friends  declared  that  George  Clinton  was  too 
old  and  too  infirm  to  be  President.  So  in  the  end  the 
Federalists  nominated  a  ticket  of  their  own,  consisting 
of  Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney,  of  South  Carolina,  for 
President,  and  Rufus  King,  of  New  York,  for  Vice- 
President,  and  all  hopes  of  a  fusion  against  Madison 
were  ended. 

Having  lost  this  opportunity,  DeWitt  Clinton,  with 
a  strange  lack  of  political  shrewdness,  made  matters 
worse  for  himself  by  trying  to  carry  the  fight  into  the 


290  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1808 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Legislature  and  by  insisting  that  Presidential  Electors 
should  be  chosen  who  would  vote  for  George  Clinton 
for  President.  This  provoked  an  open  breach  with 
Governor  Tompkins,  who  openly  opposed  such  a 
course.  It  would,  he  argued,  exhibit  and  intensify  an 
unfortunate  dissension  in  the  ranks  of  the  Democratic 
party,  it  would  offend  and  antagonize  Mr.  Madison  and 
thus  impair  the  influence  of  New  York  in  the  national 
councils,  and  it  would  do  George  Clinton  no  good, 
since  it  was  morally  certain  that  Mr.  Madison  would  be 
elected.  This  was  perfectly  sound  from  either  a 
partisan  or  a  patriotic  point  of  view.  But  DeWitt 
Clinton  would  have  none  of  it.  Indeed,  he  was  all  the 
more  confirmed  in  his  own  way  through  wrath  at  Gov- 
ernor Tompkins  for  daring  to  disagree  with  him.  The 
result  was  that  it  was  finally  agreed  to  appoint  Electors 
without  instructing  them  for  whom  to  vote,  leaving 
them  to  vote  not  unanimously  as  a  body  but  according 
to  their  individual  preferences. 

The  Thirty-second  Legislature  met  on  November  1, 
1808,  and  as  Dr.  Sheldon  had  failed  of  reelection 
James  W.  Wilkin  was  chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assembly 
by  a  vote  of  sixty  against  forty-five  for  Mr.  Van  Rens- 
selaer,  the  Federalist  candidate,  these  figures  indicating 
the  respective  strengths  of  the  parties.  The  Governor's 
address  was  entirely  non-partisan  in  tone  in  its  reference 
to  the  choice  of  Electors,  and  was  chiefly  devoted  to 
other  topics  of  State  interest.  Especially  did  he  urge 
revision  of  the  criminal  laws,  so  as  to  lessen  the  number 
of  offenses  for  which  capital  punishment  was  pre- 
scribed and  to  substitute  imprisonment  at  hard  labor 


1808]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  291 

for  flogging  in  cases  of  larceny  and  other  offenses — wise 
and  humane  recommendations,  to  which  unfortunately 
the  Legislature  did  not  respond.  On  November  7  the 
Legislature  chose  Presidential  Electors,  and  the  next 
day  it  adjourned  until  the  third  Tuesday  of  January, 
1809. 

Ambrose  Spencer  was  chosen  at  the  head  of  the 
Electoral  College  of  the  State,  but  he  proved  in  the  end 
to  be  the  leader  of  a  minority  of  it.  He  and  five  others 
voted  for  George  Clinton  for  President,  and  three  of 
them  voted  for  James  Madison  and  three  for  James 
Monroe  for  Vice-President.  All  the  rest  voted  for 
Madison  for  President  and  for  Clinton  for  Vice- 
President.  The  result  of  the  national  election  was  that 
for  President  122  votes  were  cast  for  Madison,  47  for 
Pinckney,  and  6  for  Clinton;  and  for  Vice-President, 
1 13  for  Clinton,  47  for  King,  9  for  John  Langdon,  3  for 
Madison,  and  3  for  Monroe.  The  judgment  of  Gover- 
nor Tompkins  was  vindicated.  The  casting  of  New 
York  votes  for  Clinton  for  President  had  done  him  and 
the  State  more  harm  than  good,  and  it  was  obvious  that 
if  all  the  New  York  votes  had  been  cast  for  him  the 
result  would  have  been  the  same. 

These  proceedings  made  DeWitt  Clinton  the  storm 
center  of  New  York  and  indeed  largely  of  national 
politics.  He  had  made  enemies  on  every  side.  His 
opposition  to  Madison  had  increased  the  resentment 
which  that  statesman  had  long  felt  toward  all  the  Clin- 
tons for  their  opposition  to  the  Constitution.  Clinton 
was  suspected  and  openly  charged  with  being  insincere 
in  his  professions  of  support  of  Jefferson,  since,  while  he 


292  POLITICAL  AND   GOVERNMENTAL  [1808 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

had  recanted  his  original  opposition  to  the  embargo,  he 
had  sought  and  gained  a  renewal  of  his  intimate  friend- 
ship with  Cheetham,  who  remained  as  hostile  as  ever  to 
that  policy.  For  this  same  reason  he  was  deemed 
disloyal  to  Governor  Tompkins,  since  the  latter  was 
fully  committed  to  support  of  the  Jeflersonian  policy. 
The  Livingstons  and  the  friends  of  Lewis  were  bitter 
against  him,  and  so  were  all  who  had  formerly  followed 
the  fortunes  of  Burr.  The  Martling  Men  in  New  York 
City  vied  with  the  others  in  detestation  and  denuncia- 
tion of  him. 

Had  these  various  factions  been  able  to  agree  among 
themselves,  and  to  select  a  common  leader,  Clinton's 
political  shrift  would  have  been  short.  But  just  as 
Clinton  himself  and  the  other  dissenting  Democrats  had 
failed  to  unite  with  the  Federalists  in  opposition  to 
Madison,  so  now  Clinton's  foes  failed  to  unite  against 
him.  Governor  Tompkins  might  have  made  himself 
their  leader,  but  he  refrained,  although  his  father- 
in-law,  Mangle  Minthorne,  one  of  the  richest  and  most 
influential  citizens  of  New  York,  was  the  leader  of  the 
MartlVig  Men  and  openly  manifested  the  purpose  of 
politically  destroying  Clinton.  The  spirit  of  hostility 
to  Clinton  which  prevailed  in  New  York  City  was 
strikingly  shown  in  an  article  which  appeared  in  the 
Public  Advertiser,  an  anti-Clinton  paper,  probably 
under  the  control  of  Minthorne,  in  January,  1809, 
shortly  before  the  holding  of  a  mass-meeting  of  the 
Democratic  party  in  that  city  in  support  of  the  national 
administration.  This  article  stated  that  "an  abomi- 
nable intrigue"  was  said  to  be  in  contemplation,  to  make 


1809]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  293 

DeWitt  Clinton  chairman  of  that  meeting.  aA  measure 
so  obnoxious  would  destroy  the  harmony  of  the  meet- 
ing." If  Clinton  were  proposed  for  the  place,  he  would 
be  rejected  with  disdain.  There  could  be  no  objection 
to  his  supporting  the  administration  provided  he  had 
renounced  his  errors,  especially  his  connection  with 
Cheetham  and  with  the  three  New  York  members  of 
Congress  who  had  voted  against  the  embargo.  In  the 
existing  circumstances  his  selection  as  chairman  of  the 
meeting  "would  be  viewed  as  an  insult  to  the  public 
understanding."  This  article  was  denounced  by  Clin- 
ton's Albany  organ,  the  Register,  as  a  base  libel,  since 
it  was  publicly  known  when  that  article  was  written 
Clinton  would  not  even  attend  the  meeting,  for  the 
reason  that  he  would  at  that  time  be  in  Albany  to  take 
his  seat  in  the  State  Senate. 

The  second  and  regular  meeting  of  the  Legislature 
began  on  January  24,  1809,  and  continued  until  March 
30,  when  it  was  adjourned  without  day.  The  transac- 
tions were  chiefly  of  a  routine  character,  and  while  a 
new  Council  of  Appointment  was  elected,  consisting  of 
Jonathan  Ward,  James  G.  Graham,  Isaac  Kellogg,  and 
Alexander  Rhea,  few  changes  in  office  occurred.  The 
"sweep"  had  been  made  so  thoroughly  the  year  before 
that  nothing  now  remained  to  be  done. 

The  interest  of  the  session  centered  upon  DeWitt 
Clinton's  efforts  to  rehabilitate  himself  as  the  party 
leader.  To  that  end,  only  four  days  after  the  opening 
of  the  session  he  introduced  a  series  of  resolutions 
elaborately  approving  the  embargo,  approving  Jeffer- 
son's administration,  and  expressing  confidence  in  and 


294  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1809 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

pledging  support  to  the  coming  administration  of 
Madison.  In  support  of  these  he  made  a  long,  detailed, 
and  very  able  speech,  chiefly  devoted  to  the  embargo. 
He  reviewed  the  story  of  the  troubles  between  America 
and  the  European  belligerents,  insisted  that  it  was  no 
longer  possible  to  submit  to  their  infringements  upon 
our  rights,  and  argued  that  the  embargo  was  the  best 
possible  means  to  which  our  government  could  resort. 
In  conclusion,  with  all  the  bitterness  of  invective  of 
which  he  was  an  accomplished  master,  he  condemned 
the  Federalists  for  their  opposition  to  the  embargo, 
declaring  that,  like  Milton's  Fallen  Angel,  they  thought 
it  "Better  to  reign  in  hell  than  serve  in  heaven." 

The  Federalists  met  the  challenge.  They  were 
respectable  in  numbers,  and  among  them  were  some  of 
the  ablest  men  in  the  State.  Their  leader  in  the  Assem- 
bly was  Abraham  Van  Vechten,  who  had  declined  Jay's 
offer  of  a  place  on  the  Supreme  bench  and  who  was 
probably  the  most  eloquent  orator  and  most  powerful 
debater  in  the  State  since  the  assassination  of  Hamilton. 
It  was  fortunate  for  Clinton  that  he  and  Van  Vechten 
were  in  different  houses  of  the  Legislature,  for  while  in 
intellectual  gifts  the  two  men  would  have  been  fairly 
matched,  Clinton,  with  his  quick,  stormy  temper  and 
violent  eruptions  of  heedless  anger  would  have  been  at 
a  hopeless  disadvantage  before  the  always  cool,  imper- 
turbable, self-contained  Van  Vechten  with  his 
unrivalled  gift  of  sarcasm  and  ridicule.  Van  Vechten 
had  in  a  high  degree  the  faculty  which  John  Quincy 
Adams  supremely  displayed,  of  making  his  opponents 
lose  their  tempers  while  never  losing  his  own.  A  worthy 


1809]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  295 

colleague  of  Van  Vechten's  was  Daniel  Cady,  one  of 
the  foremost  lawyers  of  the  State,  who  closed  his  distin- 
guished career  on  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court; 
whose  daughter,  Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton,  was  long 
eminent  as  the  leader  of  the  cause  of  woman's  political 
emancipation;  and  whose  name,  bestowed  as  the  bap- 
tismal name  of  an  eminent  jurist  of  our  own  day,  was 
always  used  by  the  latter  in  the  abbreviated  form, 
"D-Cady,"  on  the  ground  that  nobody  could  be  quite 
worthy  to  bear  it  in  full!  Still  another  able  Federalist 
was  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer,  who  had  been  the  Fed- 
eralist candidate  for  Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  Opposed 
to  them,  on  the  Democratic  side,  were  Nathan  Sanford, 
who  was  afterward  Chancellor;  Roger  Skinner,  after- 
ward a  United  States  Judge;  Obadiah  German,  after- 
ward United  States  Senator;  D.  L.  Van  Antwerp,  and 
other  men  of  ability. 

When,  therefore,  the  Federalists  introduced  resolu- 
tions condemning  the  embargo  and  flatly  opposing 
Clinton's  resolutions  at  almost  every  point,  a  battle  royal 
was  assured.  The  outcome  was  never  in  doubt,  of 
course,  because  the  Democrats  had  a  strong  majority 
and  the  party  feeling  was  so  strong  that  they  were  bound 
to  support  the  administration  regardless  of  the  merits 
of  the  case.  But  neither  were  the  merits  of  the  debate 
ever  in  doubt.  Clinton  and  his  friends  were  no  match 
for  Van  Vechten  and  Cady,  and  the  object  lessons  of 
financial  depression,  stagnated  commerce,  popular  dis- 
tress, and  the  disappearance  of  American  shipping  from 
the  seas  once  whitened  by  its  sails,  were  unanswerable. 
In  the  Senate  Clinton's  resolutions  were  adopted  with- 


296  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1809 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

out  the  formality  of  a  roll-call,  and  in  the  Assembly 
they  were  passed  by  a  vote  of  sixty-one  to  forty-one;  but 
at  the  April  election,  a  few  weeks  later,  the  Federalists 
swept  the  State! 

This  startling  result  was  due  in  great  part  to  the  pow- 
erful arguments  of  Van  Vechten,  Cady,  and  Van  Rens- 
selaer,  who  had  conducted  the  debate  in  the  Legislature 
not  with  any  hope  of  getting  their  resolutions  adopted 
but  for  the  sake  of  the  effect  of  their  widely  published 
speeches  upon  the  voters  of  the  State.  It  was  also  due 
to  the  fact  that  because  of  the  embargo  the  price  of 
wheat  had  fallen  from  two  dollars  to  only  seventy  cents 
a  bushel,  and  other  values  had  been  similarly  affected, 
meaning  heavy  losses  and  widespread  ruin  to  the  people. 
For  these  economic  reasons  many  of  the  followers  of 
Burr  and  of  Lewis  supported  the  Federalist  candidates. 
The  result  was  that  while  the  State  as  a  whole  showed  a 
small  Democratic  majority,  only  731,  the  Federalists 
elected  a  substantial  majority  in  the  Assembly  for  the 
first  time  since  1799.  The  geographical  distribution  of 
of  the  Federalist  vote  was  significant.  That  party 
carried  the  Eastern  and  Western  Senatorial  districts 
by  respective  majorities  of  534  and  391.  Those  were 
the  parts  of  the  State  which  had  largely  been  settled 
by  immigrants  from  New  England,  bringing  with  them, 
of  course.  Federalist  principles.  On  the  other  hand  the 
Democrats  carried  the  Southern  and  Middle  districts 
by  majorities  of  840  and  816,  where  the  influx  from 
New  England  had  been  comparatively  small.  As  the 
Senatorial  districts  were  thus  evenly  divided  between 
the  two  parties,  the  Democrats  felt  sure  that  the  Fed- 


1809]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  297 

cralist  Assembly  in  the  new  Legislature  would  have  to 
elect  two  Democrats  as  well  as  two  Federalists  to  the 
new  Council  of  Appointment,  in  which  case  the  decid- 
ing vote  of  the  Governor  would  prevent  the  turning  out 
of  Democrats  and  the  appointment  of  Federalists  in 
their  places — a  hope  which,  as  we  shall  see,  was  doomed 
to  disappointment. 

Following  the  elections  of  April,  1809,  political 
activity  was  maintained  at  fever  heat.  Both  parties 
were  chagrined  and  indignant  over  the  repudiation  by 
the  British  government  of  the  Erskine  settlement  with 
the  United  States,  the  Democrats  charging  it  against 
the  British  government  as  a  piece  of  bad  faith,  and  the 
Federalists  charging  the  Madison  administration  with 
negotiating  for  political  effect  with  an  agent  whom  it 
knew  to  be  unauthorized.  Indeed,  as  the  announcement 
of  that  "settlement"  occurred  on  the  very  eve  of  the 
New  York  elections,  there  were  those  who  accused  the 
administration  of  making  it  as  a  political  trick  for  the 
influencing  of  the  election.  Of  course  none  of  these 
violent  charges  were  well  founded,  though  there  is 
little  doubt  that  had  it  not  been  for  the  timely  announce- 
ment of  the  spurious  settlement  the  Federalists  would 
have  carried  all  four  Senatorial  districts  of  the  State 
Political  activity  in  the  press  was  also  maintained. 
Henry  Croswell,  who  had  been  indicted  for  libel  on 
President  Jefferson,  removed  his  Balance  from  Hudson 
to  Albany,  as  the  Balance  and  New  York  Journal,  and 
made  it  the  organ  of  the  Federalists  at  the  State  capital. 
Because  of  its  continued  opposition  to  the  embargo, 
Cheetham's  American  Citizen  was  repudiated  by  the 


298  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [isio 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

New  York  Democrats  and  fell  into  decline,  and  the 
Columbian  was  established  in  its  stead  as  the  Clintonian 
organ,  under  the  editorship  of  Charles  Holt,  who  under 
the  Adams  administration  had  been  indicted  for  sedi 
tion  in  Connecticut. 

These  activities  were  preliminary  to  the  campaign 
for  the  Governorship,  which  was  to  be  fought  in  18  H1 
and  which  was  formally  begun  in  good  season.  The 
Federalists  made  the  first  move.  A  large  party  meeting 
was  held  by  them  at  Albany  on  January  5,  1810,  over 
which  Abraham  Van  Vechten  presided  and  at  which 
Jonas  Platt,  of  Whitesborough,  was  nominated  for  Gov- 
ernor. At  a  later  date  Nicholas  Fish  was  nominated  for 
Lieutenant-Governor.  Mr.  Platt  was  a  man  of  high 
character  and  £  lawyer  of  fine  attainments,  and  was  one 
of  the  foremost  citizens  of  what  was  then  the  western 
part  of  the  State.  He  had  been  elected  a  State  Senator 
from  the  Western  district  in  April,  1809.  The  Demo- 
crats postponed  their  nomination  until  after  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Legislature,  but  it  was  a  foregone  conclusion 
that  they  would  renominate  Messrs.  Tompkins  and 
Broome,  as  they  did  at  a  legislative  caucus  on  Feb- 
ruary 5. 

The  Thirty-third  Legislature  met  on  January  30, 
1810,  and  the  Federalists  elected  General  William 
North,  of  Duanesburg,  Speaker  of  the  Assembly  over 
William  Livingston,  the  Democratic  candidate,  by  a 
vote  of  fifty-seven  to  forty-three,  these  figures  indicating 
the  respective  strengths  of  the  parties.  The  Governor's 
address  was  largely  devoted  to  national  and  inter- 
national affairs,  which  were  discussed  in  a  dignified 


1810]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  299 

non-partisan  manner.  Attention  was  called  to  the 
desirability  of  another  revision  of  the  statutes,  as  ten 
years  would  have  elapsed  at  the  next  session  since  such 
a  work  was  performed.  The  Legislature  took  favorable 
action  upon  the  suggestion,  and  the  result  was  the 
Revised  Statutes  of  1813.  The  Governor  also  urged 
fuller  support  of  public  education,  with  the  result  of 
prompt  legislation  to  that  end.  The  Legislature 
adjourned  without  day  on  April  6. 

The  most  important  act  of  the  Assembly  was  the 
election  of  a  new  Council  of  Appointment,  upon  the 
composition  of  which  depended  the  official  patronage 
of  the  State.  We  have  seen  that  the  Democrats  expected 
the  Council  to  be  equally  divided  between  the  two 
parties,  giving  the  Governor  the  casting  vote  in  their 
favor.  Such  indeed  was  apparently  the  result.  The 
Assembly  elected  Daniel  Parrish  of  the  Eastern  district 
and  Amos  Hall  of  the  Western  district,  both  Feder- 
alists; and  Robert  Williams  of  the  Middle  district  and 
Israel  Carl  of  the  Southern  district,  both  Democrats. 
There  were  no  Federalist  Senators  from  these  latter 
districts,  and  the  election  of  Democrats  was  therefore 
inevitable.  Mr.  Carl  was  a  staunch  and  loyal  Demo- 
crat, and  a  man  of  undoubted  integrity.  Mr.  Williams 
had  been  elected  as  a  Democrat,  and  had  formerly  been 
successively  allied  with  the  Burr,  Lewis,  and  Clinton 
factions.  At  this  time  he  was  supposed  to  be  a  Clin- 
tonian.  The  Democrats  regarded  him  as  a  trustworthy 
member  of  their  party,  and  the  Federalists  viewed  him 
in  no  other  light. 


300  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1810 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Immediately  upon  his  election  to  the  Council  of 
Appointment,  however,  he  abandoned  the  party  which 
had  elected  him,  and  voted  with  the  Federalists  on 
every  appointment.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
he  was  bribed  to  do  this,  or  that  there  was  any  corrupt 
bargain  between  him  and  the  Federalists,  who  were 
probably  as  much  surprised  at  his  course  as  were  the 
Democrats.  It  is  true  that  his  son-in-law,  Thomas  J. 
Oakley,  was  appointed  Surrogate  of  Dutchess  county 
in  place  of  James  Talmadge,  but  Oakley  was  a  man  of 
high  ability  and  unblemished  character,  fully  worthy 
of  the  appointment  and  quite  incapable  of  being  a  party 
to  a  treacherous  "deal."  But  while  they  did  not  tempt 
Williams  to  play  the  traitor,  nor  reward  him  for  so 
doing,  the  Federalists  would  have  been  more  or  less 
than  human  if  they  had  not  profited  from  it.  They  could 
not  forbid  him  to  vote  for  their  candidates,  nor  could 
they  be  expected  to  refrain  from  nominating  men 
because  he  was  sure  to  vote  for  them.  The  result  was 
that  the  Federalists  had  complete  control  of  the  Council 
of  Appointment,  and  on  the  very  principle  which 
DeWitt  Clinton  had  insisted  upon — and  which  Tomp- 
kins  had  more  wisely  opposed — they  overruled  the 
Governor  and  turned  out  every  Democratic  office- 
holder of  consequence  in  the  State.  At  the  very  first 
meeting  of  the  Council,  DeWitt  Clinton  was  removed 
from  the  lucrative  Mayoralty  of  New  York  City,  and 
Jacob  Radcliff,  one  of  the  foremost  chancery  lawyers 
of  his  day,  was  appointed  in  his  place.  J.  Ogden  Hoff- 
man was  made  Recorder  of  New  York,  Cadwallader 
D.  Golden  District  Attorney,  and  John  W.  Mulligan 


1810]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  301 

Surrogate.  Abraham  Van  Vechten  was  made  Attorney- 
General  of  the  State,  Daniel  Hale  Secretary  of  State, 
and  Theodore  V.  W.  Graham  Recorder  of  Albany.  At 
subsequent  meetings  similar  changes  were  made  of 
Judges,  Surrogates,  County  Clerks,  Sheriffs,  District 
Attorneys,  and  Justices  of  the  Peace  throughout  the 
State.  "Let  no  Democrat  remain"  was  the  order  of 
the  day.  Meantime  the  Legislature  had  similarly  dealt 
with  the  one  State  office  under  its  control,  reappointing 
Abraham  G.  Lansing  State  Treasurer — a  most  worthy 
act. 

It  is  gratifying  to  record  that,  whatever  his  motives 
had  been,  Williams  received  the  worthy  reward  of  his 
treachery  to  his  party.  The  Democrats  would  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  him,  but  stigmatized  him  as  a 
"Judas,"  while  the  Federalists,  although  they  profited 
from  his  treachery,  were  equally  cold  and  contemptuous 
toward  him.  He  served  to  the  end  of  his  term,  in 
obscurity  and  contempt,  and  then  disappeared  from  the 
public  view. 

It  should  be  added  that  during  this  session  of  the 
Legislature  there  were  for  the  first  time  acrimonious 
partisan  contests  over  the  replies  of  the  two  houses  to 
the  Governor's  address.  The  Senate,  being  Democratic, 
appointed  a  select  committee  which  drafted  a  reply 
entirely  sympathetic  with  the  address.  The  Federalist 
minority  moved  a  substitute,  strongly  disagreeing  with 
the  address,  and  a  vigorous  debate  ensued,  which  ended 
with  the  adoption  of  the  Democratic  draft.  In  the 
Assembly  a  Federalist  committee  drafted  a  reply  which 
went  to  the  very  limit  of  decorum  in  criticising  the 


302  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1810 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

national  policies  which  the  Governor  had  supporte -1 
and  in  condemning  the  course  of  the  national  adm* 
istration.  The  Democrats  moved  a  substitute  favorable 
to  the  administration,  and  there  followed  a  debate 
almost  comparable  with  that  over  DeWitt  Clinton's 
resolutions  of  the  year  before,  and  conducted  largely  by 
the  same  men.  The  result  was,  of  course,  the  adoption 
of  the  hostile  Federalist  reply.  In  his  acknowledgment 
of  this  rampant  and  rampageous  message  from  the 
Assembly,  Governor  Tompkins  very  wisely  and 
worthily  said: 

"Being  desirous  that  the  intercourse  between  the 
different  branches  of  the  government  should  be  con- 
ducted with  respectful  urbanity  and  dignified  decorum, 
and  fully  determined  that  no  consideration  shall  ever 
induce  me  to  depart  from  that  line  of  conduct,  it  cannot 
be  expected  that  I  should  notice  all  the  expressions 
contained  in  this  answer  of  your  honorable  house." 

He  then  reminded  the  Assembly  that  it  had  been  his 
official  duty  to  impart  to  the  Legislature  his  views  of 
national  affairs,  and  that  he  had  done  so  in  good  faith. 
Convinced  that  the  national  administration  had  been 
animated  by  the  purest  patriotism,  he  could  not  sub- 
scribe to  either  the  justice  or  propriety  of  the  Assem- 
bly's intimations  to  the  contrary.  Finally,  he  deprecated 
the  inculcation  of  distrust  and  suspicion,  and  urged  a 
union  of  exertions  in  support  of  the  national  govern- 
ment "to  enable  it  to  repel  with  energy  the  aggressions 
of  every  foreign  power."  It  was  the  reply  of  a  statesman 
and  patriot,  as  well  as  of  a  prudent  and  far-seeing 
politician. 


1810]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  303 

This  controversy  was,  like  that  of  the  year  before, 
intended  chiefly  for  effect  upon  the  voters  of  the  State 
at  the  coming  election  for  Governor.  It  was  Senator 
Platt,  the  Federalist  candidate  for  Governor,  who  put 
forward  the  substitute  reply  to  the  Governor's  address 
which  was  rejected  by  the  Senate.  He  knew  that  its 
rejection  was  certain,  but  the  debate  gave  him  an  oppor- 
tunity to  make  some  powerful  campaign  speeches  in  the 
Senate.  He  had  effectively  answered  DeWitt  Clinton  in 
the  former  debate,  and  he  expected  similarly  to  prevail 
with  the  electorate  on  this  occasion.  His  colleague  on 
the  ticket,  Nicholas  Fish,  had  been  a  gallant  soldier  in 
the  Revolution  and  a  friend  of  Washington  and  Hamil- 
ton, and  was  one  of  the  foremost  residents  of  New  York 
City,  where  he  was  recognized  as  the  leader  of  the  oppo- 
sition to  that  Tammany  Society — later  known  as  Tam- 
many Hall — which  was  already  dominant  in  Demo- 
cratic politics  in  that  municipality.  His  son,  named 
after  his  close  friend  Hamilton,  was  Secretary  of  State 
in  the  administration  of  President  Grant. 

Platt,  however,  overreached  himself.  His  proposed 
reply  to  the  Governor's  address  was  not  so  violent  in 
tone  as  that  of  the  Assembly.  But  it  gave  his  opponent; 
an  opportunity  to  accuse  him  of  partiality  toward  the 
British,  and  even — though  of  course  this  was  exaggera- 
tion— of  taking  England's  side  against  his  own  national 
government.  It  was  not  DeWitt  Clinton  who  made  the 
most  effective  attack  upon  Platt,  but  John  Tayler, 
Senator  from  the  Eastern  district.  Tayler  was  a 
veteran  of  the  Revolution  and  of  preceding  wars,  who 
was  familiar  with  the  compacts  between  the  British  and 


304  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1810 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Indians  and  had  personally  seen  many  horrors  of 
the  resulting  Indian  warfare.  He  was  an  orator  of 
much  dramatic  power,  too,  and  this  he  employed  with 
great  effect  against  Senator  Platt,  dwelling  upon  the 
horrors  of  Indian  massacres,  charging  the  responsibility 
for  them  upon  the  British  government,  and  then 
declaring  that  the  Federalists  were  not  only  partisans 
of  that  government  but  actually  numbered  in  their 
ranks  former  tories  who  had  personally  participated  in 
the  outrages. 

That  was  too  much  for  Daniel  Parrish,  Platt's  col- 
league and  friend,  to  endure,  and  he  made  a  speech  in 
reply  which  was  courageous  in  a  high  degree  and  was 
marked  with  perfect  truth  and  candor,  repelling  the 
quite  unwarranted  insinuations  which  Tayler  had 
made.  This  speech  should  have  had  the  more  weight 
for  the  reason  that  Parrish's  father  had  been  slain  by 
Indians  in  the  British  service,  and  Parrish  was  therefore 
the  last  man  to  be  suspected  of  partiality  in  that  direc- 
tion. But  Tayler  saw  in  it  an  opportunity  for  another 
and  deadlier  stroke.  With  far  more  audacity  than 
either  sincerity  or  good  taste,  he  took  the  floor  for  a 
theatrical  portrayal  of  the  sufferings  and  death  of  the 
elder  Parrish  at  the  hands  of  the  Indians,  in  which  he 
did  not  hesitate  to  indulge  in  exaggeration  and  invention 
for  the  sake  of  effect,  and  then,  dramatically  pointing 
to  Senator  Parrish,  exclaimed  in  his  best  tragedy  tones: 
"And  now,  now,  I  am  surprised,  I  am  grieved,  to  see 
the  son  of  that  martyr,  my  beloved  and  venerated  Revo- 
lutionary friend,  pleading  in  this  Senate  the  cause  of 
his  father's  murderers!" 


NICHOLAS  FISH 

Nicholas  Fish,  lawyer  and  soldier;  born  in  New  York  City, 
August  28,  1758;  served  through  the  revolution;  appointed 
adjutant  general  April,  1784;  supervisor  of  revenue,  1794; 
alderman  of  New  York  City,  1806-17;  died  in  New  York  City, 
June  20,  1833. 


WILLIAM  FLOYD 

William  Floyd;  born  in  Brookhaven,  L.  I.,  December  17, 
1734;  prominent  in  ante-revolutionary  movements;  delegate  to 
continental  congress,  1774-77;  signed  the  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence; member  of  state  senate,  1777-78;  again  delegate 
to  continental  congress,  1778-84;  again  a  state  senator,  1784-88; 
elected  to  first  congress  and  served  from  March  4,  1789  to 
March  3,  1791;  in  1804  moved  to  Westernville,  Oneida  county; 
delegate  to  state  constitutional  convention,  1801;  again  state 
senator,  1808;  died  at  Westernville,  N.  Y.,  August  4,  1821. 


1810]  A  "MAN  OF  THE  PEOPLE"  305 

It  was  indecent,  and  it  was  untruthful.  But  it  was 
effective.  Senator  Parrish  naturally  could  not  restrain 
himself.  He  made  an  angry  reply,  instinct  with  out- 
raged justice.  Before  the  murder  of  Hamilton  the 
incident  would  have  provoked  a  duel.  But  the  mischief 
was  done.  Senator  Tayler's  utterly  unwarranted 
aspersions  were  published  over  the  State  at  a  rate  which 
Senator  Parrish's  reply  could  never  overtake.  A  wave 
of  anglophobia  swept  over  the  State.  At  the  same  time 
the  repeal  of  the  embargo  aided  the  Democrats,  and  the 
desperate  passion  to  regain  the  offices  which  they  had 
lost  through  the  treachery  of  their  own  man,  Williams, 
roused  them  to  make  every  possible  effort. 

With  such  spirits  dominant,  and  with  such  appeals  to 
passion  presented  to  the  electors,  the  campaign  was  con- 
ducted with  a  partisan  zeal  never  before  known  in  the 
history  of  the  State.  But  after  all,  the  decisive  factor 
in  it  was  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  himself.  Had  DeWitt 
Clinton  been  the  candidate,  he  would  have  been  beaten. 
But  Tompkins  was  a  "man  of  the  people."  His  genial 
humanity  gave  him  a  personal  popularity  such  as  no 
other  candidate  had  ever  enjoyed.  His  Democracy  and 
his  loyalty  to  the  national  administration  were  unim- 
peachable, yet  he  had  never  made  himself  offensive  to 
the  Federalists.  His  temperate  and  dignified  attitude 
in  the  controversy  with  the  Assembly  had  won  him 
hosts  of  friends  and  commanded  the  admiration  even 
of  his  enemies.  His  attitude  throughout  the  campaign 
was  above  reproach.  It  was  therefore  due  to  his  per- 
sonality more  than  to  any  other  cause  that  he  was 
reelected.  He  received  43,094  votes  to  36,484  cast  for 


306  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1810 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Jonas  Platt.  With  himself  he  carried  into  office  a  safe 
Democratic  majority  in  both  branches  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. The  Democratic  candidates  were  successful  in 
all  four  Senatorial  districts,  and  in  the  Assembly  there 
was  a  Democratic  majority  of  nearly  two  to  one 
making  a  Democratic  Council  of  Appointment  certain. 
In  New  York  City  alone  the  Federalists  made  gains, 
there  electing  six  Assemblymen  to  the  Democrats'  five. 
Among  the  Senators  elected  from  the  Middle  district 
was  Morgan  Lewis,  former  Governor  of  the  State. 


CHAPTER  XIV 
CLINTON'S  AMBITION 

THE  great  victory  of  Governor  Tompkins  in  his 
reelection  should  logically  have  made  him  the 
most  conspicuous  figure  in  the  Democratic  party 
of  New  York,  and  one  of  the  very  foremost  in  the 
nation.  But  there  was  another  to  be  reckoned  with, 
more  truculent,  more  ambitious,  and  less  scrupulous, 
who  had  preceded  Tompkins  in  prominence  in  public 
life  and  was  destined  to  outlast  him.  This  was  DeWitt 
Clinton,  who  regarded  as  his  own  the  Democratic 
victory  which  had  been  won  not  so  much  by  him  or 
because  of  him  as  in  spite  of  him,  and  who  now  pur- 
posed to  utilize  its  results  in  furthering  his  own 
personal  and  selfish  ambition.  That  ambition  was  two- 
fold. One  part  of  it  was  to  be  absolute  master  and 
dictator  of  the  Democratic  party  in  the  State  of  New 
York.  The  other  was,  to  gain  for  himself  the  Presi- 
dency of  the  United  States  which  he  had  vainly  tried  to 
secure  for  his  uncle. 

In  the  furtherance  of  this  ambition  he  was  confronted 
not  alone  with  the  opposition  of  the  Federalist  party  but 
also  with  two  powerful  antagonists  within  the  Demo- 
cratic party  itself.  One  of  these  was  the  national 
administration.  He  had  already  incurred  the  hostility 
of  President  Madison,  bestowed  upon  him  in  return 
for  his  own  toward  Madison ;  and  it  was  measurably 
intensified  as  it  became  more  and  more  evident  that 

307 


308  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1810 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Clinton  intended  to  put  himself  forward  as  a  candidate 
in  opposition  to  Madison's  reelection  to  a  second  term. 

The  other,  and  more  active  and  violent  antagonist, 
was  Tammany  Hall,  as  we  may  now  call  the  faction  in 
New  York  City  hitherto  known  as  Martling's  Men. 
The  two  names  were  not,  it  is  true,  precisely  synony- 
mous. The  Society  of  St.  Tammany,  or  Columbian 
Order,  had  been  founded  in  1789  as  a  non-partisan, 
non-political,  patriotic,  and  charitable  organization, 
thoroughly  democratic  in  character  and  therefore  con- 
trasting with  the  Order  of  the  Cincinnati,  which  was 
regarded  as  aristocratic.  Its  membership  included 
Federalists  and  Anti-Federalists,  "Anglicans"  and 
"Gallicans,"  Hamiltonians  and  Clintonians.  But  long 
before  the  completion  of  its  first  decade  it  was  trans- 
formed into  an  intensely  political  and  partisan  body, 
anti-Federalist  and  therefore  Democratic,  but  also 
strongly  Clintonian.  It  transferred  its  meeting-place 
to  the  "Long  Room"  in  Abraham  Martling's  tavern, 
and  thus  became  closely  associated  and  practically 
identified  with  "Martling's  Men."  For  this  radical 
change,  which  was  assuredly  not  for  the  better,  but 
which  was  the  beginning  of  processes  which  in  later 
change,  which  was  assuredly  not  for  the  better  but 
Aaron  Burr  was  responsible.  He  was  not,  it  is  true,  an 
officer  or  even  a  member  of  the  Tammany  Society.  But 
his  friends  controlled  that  organization,  and  through 
them  he  utilized  it  to  his  selfish  and  corrupt  ends. 

By  the  time  of  which  we  are  now  speaking,  Tam- 
many had  become  a  great  power  in  the  Democratic 
party  in  New  York  City — generally  the  dominant 


1810]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  309 

power.  This  was  owing  to  its  thorough  organization  as 
a  political  "machine."  It  had  a  "leader"  in  every  ward, 
and  under  him  a  leader  in  every  district.  It  had  a 
catalogue  containing  the  name  and  address  of  every 
voter  in  the  city,  with  a  note  of  his  political  affiliation 
or  inclination,  and  also  of  the  influence — personal, 
social,  business,  church,  or  what  not — which  might  most 
effectively  be  exerted  upon  him ;  and  it  was  the  business 
of  every  district  leader  to  see  to  it  that  every  voter  was 
properly  "approached"  at  election  time  and  the  most 
suitable  "influence"  was  exercised  upon  him.  The 
organization  also  maintained  its  original  charitable 
purposes  and  practices  sufficiently  to  win  for  it  the 
gratitude  and  support  of  many  poor  people,  whose  rent 
it  paid  or  whose  larders  it  replenished  at  the  psycho- 
logical moment,  just  before  election. 

Tammany  at  this  time  concerned  itself  chiefly  with 
local  matters,  paying  comparatively  little  attention  to 
State  and  still  less  to  national  politics.  In  its  oppo- 
sition to  DeWitt  Clinton,  however,  it  reached  out  into 
State  affairs,  and  also  cooperated  sympathetically  with 
the  Madison  administration  at  Washington. 

After  the  election  of  April,  1810,  ensued  a  period  of 
apparent  quiet,  though  in  fact  it  was  one  of  exceptional 
activity  beneath  the  surface,  all  parties  and  factions 
diligently  preparing  for  the  approaching  conflict.  An 
unexpected  turn  was  given  to  affairs  in  August  by  the 
death  of  the  Lieutenant-Governor,  Mr.  Broome,  and 
plans  were  promptly  laid  by  various  aspiring  politicians 
to  secure  the  succession  to  him.  Chief  among  these  was 
DeWitt  Clinton  himself.  It  seemed  strange,  from  one 


310  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1811 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

point  of  view,  that  he  should  be  willing  and  even  eager 
to  secure  an  office  in  which  he  would  be  subordinate  to 
Governor  Tompkins,  whom  he  affected  to  regard  with 
contempt.  But  the  explanation  was  clear  and  convinc- 
ing. For  the  furtherance  of  his  political  ambitions  it 
was  necessary  for  him  to  be  at  Albany  in  some  official 
capacity.  He  had  not  ventured  to  seek  election  as  a 
State  Senator  from  New  York,  because  the  local  oppo- 
sition of  Tammany,  which  might  be  fused  with  that  of 
the  Federalists,  would  probably  defeat  him.  But  as  a 
candidate  for  the  Lieutenant-Governorship  he  would 
be  voted  for — and  against — by  the  whole  State,  and  he 
counted  on  the  great  following  which  his  uncle  had  in 
Ulster  and  other  counties  "up  the  State"  to  counter- 
balance the  defection  and  hostility  of  Tammany  in  New 
York. 

Before  such  an  election,  however,  it  was  necessary 
for  the  Legislature  to  take  action.  The  Thirty-fourth 
Legislature  met  at  Albany  on  January  29,  1811,  under 
Democratic  control.  Nathan  Sanford,  of  New  York, 
was  chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  and  Stephen 
North,  of  Delaware  county,  Clerk.  The  Governor  in 
his  address  dwelt  largely  upon  the  increasingly  unsatis- 
factory and  ominous  character  of  the  nation's  foreign 
relations;  he  recommended  provision  for  the  election 
of  a  Lieutenant-Governor  at  the  next  election,  in  April, 
which  the  Legislature  promptly  made;  he  referred  to 
the  desirability  of  revision  of  the  statutes,  and  of  greater 
attention  to  the  public  school  system;  and  he  announced 
a  forthcoming  report  from  Commissioners  on  the  pro- 
ject of  canal  connection  between  the  Hudson  River  and 


1811]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  311 

Lake  Erie  and  Lake  Ontario — a  report  which  was 
presented  on  March  2  following,  and  which  gave 
Clinton  opportunity  to  secure  the  passage,  on  April  8, 
1811,  of  a  bill  for  internal  improvements  in  the  State 
which  was  the  first  real  step  toward  the  Erie  canal. 
A  bill  was  passed  on  April  9  authorizing  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  commission  which  should  report  to  the  next 
Legislature  plans  for  a  comprehensive  and  permanent 
system  of  common  schools;  and  on  the  same  day  the 
Legislature  adjourned. 

Meantime  the  spoils  system  went  merrily  on.  The 
Assembly  elected  a  new  Council  of  Appointment  the 
day  after  the  opening  of  the  session.  This  body  consisted 
of  Benjamin  Coe,  of  the  Southern;  James  W.  Wilkin, 
of  the  Middle;  John  McLean,  of  the  Eastern;  and 
Philetus  Swift,  of  the  Western  district.  It  was  Demo- 
cratic in  political  complexion,  and  it  promptly  pro- 
ceeded to  make  a  "clean  sweep"  of  the  offices,  turning 
out  all  the  Federalists  whom  its  predecessor  had 
appointed  and  filling  their  places  with  Democrats. 
Mr.  Hildreth  was  reappointed  Attorney-General;  Mr. 
Jenkins,  Secretary  of  State;  John  Van  Ness  Yates, 
Recorder  of  Albany;  and  DeWitt  Clinton,  of  course, 
Mayor  of  New  York. 

This  latter  office  was  immensely  valuable  to  Clinton 
as  a  political  asset.  He  was  himself  a  rich  man  and  he 
had  married  a  rich  wife,  while  the  salary  and  fees  of 
the  office  amounted  to  probably  as  much  as  twenty 
thousand  dollars  a  year,  which  in  those  days  was 
equivalent  to  a  hundred  thousand  dollars  a  century 
later.  Thus  he  was  enabled  to  live  in  luxurious  style, 


312  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1811 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

and  to  dispense  benefactions  and  charities  on  a  scale 
which  the  Tammany  Society  could  scarcely  hope  to 
rival.  If  we  reckon  him  to  have  been  the  last  of  the 
great  family  chieftains  in  New  York  State  politics,  we 
must  credit  him  with  having  been  the  greatest  of  them 
all  in  the  giving  of  largesse  to  his  retainers. 

He  was  the  first  eminent  New  York  politician,  also, 
to  cater  to  the  naturalized  element  in  the  citizenry,  and 
especially  to  that  Irish  element  which  already  was 
important  and  which  in  later  years  was  dominant  in 
New  York  City.  To  this  element  his  appeal  was 
peculiarly  strong.  He  had,  as  a  United  States  Senator, 
been  active  in  securing  the  reduction  of  the  naturaliza- 
tion period  from  fourteen  years  to  five.  This  change 
enabled  the  Irish  immigrants,  who  were  flocking  to 
New  York,  speedily  to  become  citizens  and  thus  be 
secure  against  deportation.  He  had  also  taken  the  lead 
in  securing  the  repeal  of  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws, 
under  which  Irish  political  refugees  were  in  danger  of 
being  returned  to  British  jurisdiction.  The  Irish 
Rebellion  of  1798  had  resulted  in  the  flight  of  many 
Irishmen  to  this  country.  Among  them  was  Thomas 
Addis  Emmet,  brother  of  Robert  Emmet.  Under  the 
Alien  and  Sedition  laws,  not  one  of  them  was  safe,  and 
under  the  fourteen  years'  naturalization  period  their 
prospects  were  indeed  unpromising.  But  when  that 
period  was  reduced  to  five  years,  and  meanwhile  they 
were  freed  from  the  danger  of  deportation  and  their 
political  asylum  was  made  inviolable,  conditions  were 
radically  transformed.  Clinton  never  lost  an  oppor- 


1811]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  313 

tunity  of  causing  Irishmen  to  feel  that  they  owed  this 
happy  change  in  their  status  to  him,  and  in  consequence 
he  won  their  support  to  a  far  greater  extent  than 
Tammany  Hall  was  able  to  do. 

As  soon  as  the  Legislature  provided  for  the  election 
of  a  Lieutenant-Governor  to  succeed  John  Broome, 
in  April,  1811,  a  caucus  of  the  Democratic  members 
placed  DeWitt  Clinton  in  nomination  and  issued  an 
address  to  the  people  of  the  State  in  his  support. 
Throughout  the  State  generally  this  was  well  received. 
But  in  New  York  City,  despite  Clinton's  influence  as 
Mayor  and  as  one  of  the  richest  and  most  bountiful 
citizens,  there  was  an  open  revolt  against  it.  Tammany 
took  the  lead.  A  public  mass-meeting  was  called,  at 
Martling's  "Long  Room,"  which  that  room  could  not 
contain  but  which  overflowed  into  the  City  Hall  Park. 
Teunis  Wortman,  who  had  been  Clinton's  aid  in  his 
fight  with  Burr,  was  foremost  in  convoking  it.  Mangle 
Minthorne,  father-in-law  of  Governor  Tompkins,  was 
chairman,  and  John  Bingham  was  secretary.  Strong 
speeches  were  made,  condemning  Clinton's  candidacy 
and  condemning  the  man  himself.  Formal  resolutions 
were  adopted,  expressing  a  belief  that  Clinton  was  no 
longer  in  sympathy  with  the  principles  and  interests  of 
the  Democratic  party  and  should  no  longer  be  con- 
sidered a  member  of  it ;  that  he  had  opposed  the  election 
of  Mr.  Madison  as  President  of  the  United  States;  and 
that  he  was  attempting  to  establish  in  his  own  person 
a  pernicious  family  aristocracy  under  which  devotion 
to  his  person  would  be  the  exclusive  test  of  merit  and 
the  only  passport  to  promotion. 


314  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1811 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

This  meeting  then  nominated,  as  Clinton's  rival 
for  the  Lieutenant-Governorship,  Colonel  Marinus 
Willett.  It  will  be  recalled  that  this  officer  had  dis- 
played distinguished  merit  in  the  Revolution,  and  had 
always  commanded  high  esteem  for  his  personal 
character.  His  political  course  had,  however,  been 
marked  with  inconsistencies  and  weakness.  He  had  at 
one  time  supported  Burr,  had  been  a  partisan  of 
Morgan  Lewis,  and  had  been  appointed  Mayor  of  New 
York  by  the  Council  of  Appointment  which  ousted 
DeWitt  Clinton  from  that  office.  Still,  his  personal 
character  was  so  high  and  his  military  reputation  so 
brilliant  that  he  was  probably  Tammany's  best  can- 
didate. Tammany,  or  Martling's  Men,  also  nominated 
Nathan  Sanford,  who  had  been  Speaker  of  the 
Assembly,  for  State  Senator  from  New  York.  This 
nomination  was  significant.  For  Mr.  Sanford  was  at 
this  time  United  States  District  Attorney.  He  had 
been  appointed  to  that  office  by  President  Madison,  and 
was  in  receipt  from  it  of  an  income  in  salary  and  fees 
of  more  than  thirty  thousand  dollars  a  year.  It  was 
scarcely  conceivable  that  he  would  have  accepted  the 
Tammany  and  anti-Clinton  nomination  had  he  not  been 
certain  that  such  a  course  would  be  pleasing  to  the 
President.  There  were  not  a  few  at  that  time,  Clinton 
among  them,  who  saw  in  that  candidacy  proof  of 
cooperation  between  Madison  and  Tammany  Hall. 

Clinton  was  not  content  with  the  nomination  of  the 
Legislative  caucus,  but  sought  to  have  it  ratified  by  a 
citizens'  meeting  in  New  York  as  a  counterblast  to  the 
meeting  at  Martling's.  Such  a  meeting  was  formed  at 


1811]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  315 

the  Union  Hotel,  with  Arthur  Smith  as  chairman  and 
Hector  Craig  as  secretary.  But  it  was  invaded  and 
broken  up,  with  much  confusion  and  some  violence,  by 
a  throng  of  the  retainers  of  Tammany. 

The  Federalists  declined  some  overtures  for  a  fusion 
with  Tammany,  and  nominated  their  own  candidate  in 
the  person  of  Nicholas  Fish,  whose  fine  character  and 
talents  commanded  the  full  support  of  that  party. 
Indeed,  not  a  few  Tammany  men  voted  for  him, 
realizing  that  he  was  by  far  stronger  as  a  candidate  than 
Colonel  Willett. 

The  campaign  was  intensely  animated  in  New  York 
City,  but  elsewhere  throughout  the  State  it  was  con- 
ducted in  a  perfunctory  and  languid  manner,  the 
success  of  the  Democratic  party  being  generally 
regarded  as  a  foregone  conclusion.  In  New  York  City, 
however,  the  result  was  astounding.  Clinton,  despite 
his  prestige  as  Mayor  and  despite  his  bounties  and  his 
wooing  of  the  Irish  vote,  received  only  590  ballots. 
Colonel  Willett,  despite  his  war  record  and  the  ener- 
getic methods  of  Tammany,  received  only  678.  But 
Nicholas  Fish,  the  candidate  of  the  discredited  Fed- 
eralists, received  2,044 — a  tribute  to  his  personal  worth 
and  an  indication  of  the  disgust  which  many  felt  for  the 
tactics  of  both  Clinton  and  Tammany  Hall. 

Elsewhere  in  the  State,  however,  Willett  was  practi- 
cally ignored,  and  Clinton  polled  so  large  a  majority 
over  Fish  as  far  more  than  to  counterbalance  the  result 
in  the  city;  and  Clinton  was  thus  handsomely  elected 
Lieutenant-Governor.  At  the  same  time  Sanford 
was  elected  Senator  from  New  York,  showing  how 


316  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

prudent  it  was  for  Clinton  to  avoid  candidacy  for  that 
office,  and  also  suggesting  that,  as  already  stated,  many 
Tammany  men,  who  voted  for  Sanford  for  Senator, 
voted  for  Fish  for  Lieutenant-Governor.  In  connec- 
tion with  the  Senatorship  it  is  to  be  noted  that  in 
this  year  the  Democrats  changed  their  method  of 
making  nominations  for  that  office.  Thitherto  the 
Senatorial  candidates  had  been  chosen  by  caucuses  of 
the  Assemblymen  from  the  respective  Senatorial  dis- 
tricts. Beginning  in  1811  they  were  chosen  at  county 
conventions,  delegates  to  which  had  been  chosen  at 
party  primaries  in  the  towns.  The  election  was  on 
the  whole  strongly  in  favor  of  the  Democrats,  who 
elected  not  only  DeWitt  Clinton  to  be  Lieutenant- 
Governor  but  also  73  Assemblymen  to  only  39  secured 
by  the  Federalists.  The  Democratic  strength  was 
therefore  increased  above  that  in  the  preceding  Legis- 
lature. 

The  Thirty-fifth  Legislature  met  on  January  28, 1812, 
with  DeWitt  Clinton  presiding  over  the  Senate  as  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor. Alexander  Sheldon  was  returned  to 
his  old  place  as  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  and  Samuel 
North  was  chosen  Clerk.  The  Governor's  address  was 
largely  devoted  to  the  impending  war  with  Great 
Britain,  for  which  he  urged  that  New  York  should 
make  ample  preparation.  He  recommended  the  adop- 
tion of  measures  for  the  gradual  and  ultimate  aboli- 
tion of  human  slavery,  and  the  repeal  of  the  law 
authorizing  the  transportation  of  slaves  convicted  of 
offenses;  the  amelioration  of  relations  with  the  Indian 
tribes;  the  investigation  of  titles  to  the  Onondaga  salt 


1812]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  317 

lots  with  a  view  to  preventing  private  monopoly; 
reform  of  the  public  land  system;  and  various  other 
measures.  The  chief  topic  of  an  exceptionally  long 
and  important  address  was,  however,  that  relating  to 
the  chartering  and  control  of  banking  institutions,  of 
which  we  shall  hear  more  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 

The  Legislature  made  a  new  Congressional  appor- 
tionment of  the  State  on  the  basis  of  the  census  of  1810, 
dividing  it  into  21  districts,  of  which  6  were  to  elect 
two  Representatives  each  and  the  others  one  each,  mak- 
ing 27  in  all.  The  first  election  under  this  apportion- 
ment was  to  be  held  on  December  15,  16,  and  17,  1812, 
and  subsequent  elections  on  the  last  Tuesday  of  April 
and  two  days  following  it,  in  each  even-numbered 
year. 

The  Canal  commissioners  reported  that  Congress 
had  declined  to  grant  national  aid  to  the  Erie  canal 
scheme,  but  that  the  scheme  was  feasible  and  should 
be  undertaken  by  New  York  alone  if  the  aid  of  the 
nation  or  other  States  could  not  be  secured.  The 
Legislature  thereupon  continued  the  commission  in 
existence,  and  authorized  it  to  borrow  not  more  than 
$5,000,000  for  the  project. 

On  March  27  the  Governor — for  reasons  which  we 
shall  hereafter  see — prorogued  the  Legislature  until 
May  21,  and  on  June  19  it  adjourned  to  meet  on  the 
first  Tuesday  of  November,  1812,  for  the  choice  of 
Presidential  Electors.  Just  before  adjourning,  how- 
ever, acting  upon  a  detailed  report  of  Commissioners 
appointed  to  consider  the  matter,  it  enacted  a  statute 
permanently  establishing  a  comprehensive  system  of 


318  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

common  schools,  under  which  law  the  system  was  main- 
tained for  more  than  eighty  years,  or  until  a  constitu- 
tional provision  was  adopted  in  1894. 

Amid  all  these  transactions  DeWitt  Clinton  was 
keeping  his  eye  fixed  upon  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States  and  was  exerting  his  utmost  efforts  toward 
attaining  that  goal.  Even  bereavement  was  made  to 
conduce  to  that  end.  On  April  20,  1812,  George 
Clinton  died,  "full  of  years  and  honor,"  and  thus 
removed  the  last  obstacle  to  his  nephew's  candidacy. 
DeWitt  might — and  might  not — have  hesitated  to 
accept  formal  candidacy  for  the  Presidency  while  his 
uncle  was  still  Vice-President.  It  is  probable  that  he 
would  not  have  hesitated,  or  at  any  rate  would  not  have 
refused,  on  that  account,  since  long  before  his  uncle's 
death  he  was  an  openly  avowed  candidate  for  the 
Democratic  nomination  against  Madison,  and  in  all 
probability  would  have  had  himself  thus  nominated  by 
the  Democratic  caucus  of  New  York  Legislature  long 
before  April  20  if  the  Governor  had  not,  on  March  27, 
taken  the  extraordinary  and  unprecedented  step  of 
proroguing  the  Legislature.  There  were,  indeed, 
many  who  thought  and  openly  declared  that  the 
Governor  took  that  step,  not,  as  stated  in  his  message, 
because  of  complications  over  bank  charters,  but  chiefly 
for  the  sake  of  delaying  such  nomination  of  Clinton 
until  a  Congressional  caucus  could  formally  put  Madi- 
son in  the  field  as  candidate  for  a  second  term  and 
thus  give  him  the  double  advantage  of  being  nominated 
first  and  of  being  the  regular  party  candidate. 


1812]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  319 

At  any  rate,  it  was  while  the  New  York  Legislature 
was  thus  prorogued,  on  May  18,  1812,  that  a  Con- 
gressional caucus  of  seventeen  Senators  and  sixty- 
six  Representatives  formally  renominated  Madison. 
Three  days  later  the  New  York  Legislature  reassem- 
bled, and  eleven  days  thereafter  a  caucus  of  the  Demo- 
cratic members,  comprising  ninety  out  of  ninety-five, 
put  Clinton  in  the  field  as  an  opposition  candidate.  It 
must  not  be  imagined  that  this  action  represented  any- 
thing like  the  unanimous  judgment  or  desire  of  the 
Democratic  party  of  New  York.  On  the  contrary, 
many  of  its  ablest  members  were  outspoken  in  their 
disapproval  of  it.  Governor  Tompkins  was  himself 
cherishing  Presidential  ambitions,  not  for  that  year  but 
for  four  or  eight  years  later,  but  quite  apart  from  that 
fact  he  regarded  Clinton's  candidacy  as  a  mistake,  if 
not  worse.  The  Livingston  family  and  its  followers, 
still  numerous  and  influential,  were  arrayed  against  it. 
Of  course  all  the  Tammany  Society,  or  Martling's  Men, 
were  hostile.  Erastus  Root  was  outspoken  against  it. 
Ambrose  Spencer  and  John  Tayler  acquiesced  in  it 
under  protest.  But  Clinton,  as  was  his  wont,  disre- 
garded all  opposition.  It  was  one  of  his  most  serious 
defects  as  a  political  strategist  that,  in  his  own  over- 
weening pride,  he  invariably  underrated  his  opponents. 

Upon  two  bases  he  built  the  tall  tower  of  his  hopes 
of  success.  One  was  the  prevalent  resentment  through- 
out the  north  against  what  had  become  known  as  the 
Virginia  dynasty.  During  twenty-four  years  Vir- 
ginians had  filled  the  Presidency  for  twenty  years,  and 
it  was  now  purposed  to  fill  it  thus  for  another  four 


320  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

years.  That  feeling  was  widespread,  not  only  among 
Federalists  but  among  Democrats  as  well,  and  Clinton 
hoped  that  it  would  prove  sufficient  to  give  him  the 
votes  of  New  York,  all  New  England,  and  probably 
all  States  north  and  east  of  the  Potomac  River.  The 
other  hope  was  that  the  Federalists,  who  were  still  a 
factor  seriously  to  be  reckoned  with,  would  adopt  him 
as  their  candidate.  In  order  to  secure  such  support  he 
began  calling  himself  an  American  Federalist,  and  to 
declare  his  sympathy  with  their  opposition  to  the  war. 
He  had  begun  by  denouncing  Madison  for  not  being 
strong  enough  to  wage  the  war  with  sufficient  vigor,  and 
he  now  promised  the  Federalists  that  if  they  would  help 
to  elect  him  President  he  would  immediately  make 
peace  with  Great  Britain.  He  condemned  the  war  as 
a  southern  device  for  ruining  the  commerce  of  New 
England. 

Early  in  August  Clinton  sought  a  conference  with 
John  Jay,  Rufus  King,  and  Gouverneur  Morris,  with 
the  purpose  of  organizing  a  Peace  party  composed  of 
Federalists  and  Clintonian  Democrats,  with  himself  as 
its  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  The  meeting  was 
held  at  Morris's  home,  at  Morrisania,  and  was  marked 
with  a  frank  interchange  of  views.  Clinton  denounced 
Madison  as  incapable  of  being  a  satisfactory  President, 
and  declared  upon  his  honor  that  he  had  completely 
and  forever  broken  with  him.  Yet  he  did  not  deem 
it  politic  to  make  such  a  statement  publicly,  feeling 
that  thus  he  might  alienate  many  Democrats  who 
through  a  more  cautious  policy  might  be  retained 
among  his  supporters.  The  result  of  this  conference 


PIERRE  VAN  CORTLAXDT,  JR. 

Pierre  Van  Cortlandt,  Jr.;  horn  in  Van  Cortlandt  Manor, 
Groton,  N.  Y.,  August  29,  1762;  studied  law  in  the  office  of 
Alexander  Hamilton;  member  of  assembly,  1792,  1794-5; 
member  of  congress,  1811-13;  died  in  Peekskill,  N.  Y.,  July  13, 
1848. 


MARIN'US    WlLLETT 

Marinus  Willett,  soldier,  born  in  Jamaica,  L.  I.,  July  31, 
1740;  served  in  French  and  Indian  wars  and  the  revolutionary 
war,  in  the  latter  commanding  the  forces  in  the  Mohawk 
Valley;  sheriff  of  N.  Y.  county,  1784;  mayor  of  New  York, 
1807;  president  of  electoral  college,  1824;  died  in  N7ew  York 
City,  August  22,  1830. 


1812]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  321 

was  indecisive.  King  had  both  before  and  after  it  no 
faith  in  Clinton's  sincere  devotion  to  anything  but  his 
own  selfish  advancement,  while  Jay  felt  a  strong 
repugnance  to  any  such  bargaining  as  had  been  pro- 
posed. Morris  had  been  associated  with  Clinton  in 
the  Canal  commission  and  felt  more  kindly  toward 
him  than  either  of  the  others,  but  even  he  was  not  con- 
vinced of  the  propriety  of  making  Clinton  the  Fed- 
eralist candidate. 

At  the  middle  of  September  there  was  a  meeting  of 
several  score  representative  Federalists,  from  all  States 
north  of  the  Potomac,  to  consider  the  question  of  a 
Presidential  candidate.  There  was  general  agreement 
upon  the  impossibility  of  electing  a  straight-out  Fed- 
eralist, for  which  reason  some,  whose  chief  desire  was 
to  return  the  party  to  power  by  no  matter  what  means, 
strongly  urged  a  coalition  with  the  Clintonians. 
Others,  chief  among  whom  was  Rufus  King,  opposed 
such  a  course  and  advised  the  nomination  of  the 
best  possible  Federalist  candidate.  He  would  not  be 
elected,  but  the  party  organization  would  be  main- 
tained, its  principles  would  be  confirmed,  and  its  honor 
would  be  untarnished.  To  support  Clinton  would 
stultify  the  party,  he  insisted;  and  he  recalled  that 
Clinton  had  at  first  condemned  the  embargo  and  then 
approved  it  and  confirmed  his  approval  of  it  with  a 
bitter  tirade  against  the  Federalists  for  opposing  it. 
To  elect  him,  he  exclaimed,  might  prove  to  be  placing 
a  Ca3sar  Borgia  in  the  Presidency  in  place  of  James 
Madison. 


322  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

That  was  too  extreme,  to  liken  Clinton  to  Borgia, 
and  the  impassioned  utterance  reacted  against  King 
and  the  cause  he  was  pleading.  Harrison  Gray  Otis 
took  advantage  of  it  in  pleading  the  other  side  of  the 
case.  He  urged  that  the  defeat  of  Madison  was  the 
thing  most  of  all  to  be  desired,  since  it  would  be  a 
repudiation  of  his  war  policy  and  would  lead  to  speedy 
peace.  In  the  end  he  carried  the  day.  The  convention 
adopted  resolutions  opposing  Madison  in  strong  terms 
and  advocating  the  election  of  DeWitt  Clinton  because 
of  his  possession  of  qualities  which  assured  the  country 
of  more  capable  leadership. 

At  this  time  Clinton  and  his  chief  supporters  felt 
confident  of  carrying  New  York,  all  of  New  Eng- 
land, New  Jersey,  and  Delaware,  and  of  getting  at  least 
some  votes  in  Maryland,  Ohio,  and  North  Carolina. 
Even  in  Virginia  they  thought  there  was  a  possibility 
of  securing  a  few.  Pennsylvania  was  in  doubt,  but  if 
it  could  be  gained  for  Clinton  his  election  would  be 
assured.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Clinton  was  not  sure  of 
his  own  State.  The  State  administration  was  against 
him,  and  so  was  a  large  faction  of  the  Democratic 
party,  led  by  Erastus  Root.  The  Legislature  which 
was  in  November  to  choose  Presidential  Electors  had 
been  elected  in  April,  and  was  much  divided  between 
Clinton  and  Madison.  No  fewer  than  twenty  Demo- 
cratic Assemblymen  insisted  that  the  Electoral  College 
of  the  State  should  not  be  unanimous,  but  should  be 
divided  between  Clinton  and  Madison  in  the  same 
ratio  that  the  Legislature  itself  was  divided,  which 
would  mean  at  least  one-third  for  Madison. 


1812]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  323 

There  now  came  to  the  fore  a  new  figure  in  Demo- 
cratic politics,  destined  to  play  a  leading  part.  This 
was  a  young  man  named  Martin  Van  Buren.  He  was 
the  son  of  a  Kinderhook  tavern-keeper,  who  had  studied 
law  in  the  office  of  William  P.  Van  Ness,  the  friend 
of  Burr,  and  had  later  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law 
on  his  own  account  at  Kinderhook.  After  serving  for 
a  time  as  Surrogate  of  Columbia  county,  in  April, 
1812,  he  was  elected  to  the  State  Senate,  at  the  age  of 
only  thirty  years,  and  would  therefore  take  his  seat  for 
the  first  time  when  the  Legislature  met  to  choose 
Presidential  Electors.  Now,  Kinderhook  was  a  hotbed 
of  Federalism,  and  the  young  man's  teacher.  Van  Ness, 
as  "Aristides,"  had  been  one  of  the  fiercest  foes  of  the 
Clintons  and  Democrats  in  general.  Nevertheless,  Van 
Buren  was  resolutely  committed  to  the  principles  of 
Jeffersonian  Democracy,  and  to  the  principle  of  party 
"regularity."  That  he  was  greatly  enamored  of  Clin- 
ton does  not  appear.  The  men  were  so  different  tem- 
peramentally that  close  friendship  between  them 
would  have  been  extraordinary.  Nor  does  it  appear 
that  he  regarded  Clinton  as  sure  of  winning  and  so 
wished  to  be  on  the  victorious  side.  But  he  was  a 
strict  party  man,  and  since  the  party  caucus  had 
declared  for  Clinton  he  was  for  him. 

We  have  said  that  Van  Buren  was  very  unlike 
Clinton.  In  manner  he  was  his  opposite — suave, 
plausible,  ingratiating,  politic;  a  natural  manager  of 
men  So  it  came  to  pass  that  when  the  Thirty-sixth 
Legislature  met  on  November  3,  1812,  this  young  man, 
entering  that  body  for  the  first  time,  was  immediately 


324  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

accepted  as  the  leader  of  the  Clintonian  Democrats. 
He  commanded,  too,  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the 
Madisonians,  since  he  had  never  attacked  the  President 
or  his  policy.  On  the  contrary,  he  had  approved  the 
embargo,  he  had  approved  non-intercourse,  he  had 
approved  the  war.  He  was  a  "straight  party  man," 
and  if  now  he  was  opposing  Madison  it  was  not 
because  he  disapproved  him  but  because  he  regarded 
Clinton  as  the  regular  candidate  of  the  New  York 
Democracy,  whom  it  was  his  duty  to  support.  To  that 
shrewd,  logical,  and  doubtless  sincere  attitude  it  was 
impossible  to  take  exception.  But  we  must  add  that 
Van  Buren  proceeded  to  promote  Clinton's  candidacy 
with  every  trick  and  intrigue  at  the  hand  of  one  of  the 
most  skillful  political  strategists  New  York  has  ever 
produced. 

The  result  of  his  master-hand  was  quickly  seen.  The 
Legislature  met  for  joint  ballot,  and  74  votes  were  cast 
for  Clintonian  Electors  and  45  for  Federalists,  while 
28  Madisonians,  led  by  Erastus  Root,  refrained  from 
voting.  That  assured  Clinton  the  solid  vote  of  New 
York.  Had  there  been  a  Van  Buren  in  Pennsylvania, 
Clinton  would  surely  have  won.  But  there  was  not, 
and  that  State  went  solidly  for  Madison.  The  out- 
come was  that  Clinton  carried  New  York,  all  New 
England  but  Vermont ;  New  Jersey  and  Delaware ;  and 
got  five  votes  in  Maryland.  These  gave  him  a  total 
of  89.  Madison  got  all  the  rest,  a  total  of  128. 

Clinton  was  thus  defeated  in  his  supreme  ambition 
for  the  Presidency.  Nevertheless,  he  was  not  without 
consolation.  He  had  shown  himself  the  strongest  man 


1812]  CLINTON'S  AMBITION  325 

in  the  Democratic  party  in  New  York,  able  to  com- 
mand a  majority  of  its  votes  and  to  win  a  large  pro- 
portion of  Federalist  votes  as  well.  For  we  must 
remember  that  the  Thirty-sixth  Legislature  was  half  a 
Federalist  body.  The  Assembly  elected  Jacob  R.  Van 
Rensselaer,  a  Federalist,  Speaker  by  a  vote  of  58,  to  46 
for  William  Ross,  Democrat,  and  one  for  Mr.  Hunt- 
ington,  and  by  a  similar  vote  elected  James  Van  Ingen, 
Federalist,  Clerk.  In  the  Senate  there  were  9  Feder- 
alists, 4  Madisonian  Democrats,  and  19  Clintonian 
Democrats;  in  the  Assembly  there  were  58  Federalists, 
22  Madisonian  Democrats,  and  29  Clintonian  Demo- 
crats. On  a  joint  ballot,  then,  there  were  67  Federalists, 
48  Clintonian  Democrats,  and  26  Madisonian  Demo- 
crats. The  Federalists  had  a  strong  plurality,  though  not 
a  majority.  But  the  Federalists  had  a  clear  majority  in 
the  Assembly,  and  the  Clintonians  in  the  Senate.  The 
vote  by  which  Clintonian  Electors  was  chosen  was  of 
course  obtained  by  the  casting  of  many  Federalist  votes 
for  Clinton.  Finally,  these  circumstances  assured  the 
choice  of  a  Council  of  Appointment  which  would  not 
disturb  Clinton  in  the  Mayoralty  of  New  York,  nor 
turn  any  of  his  friends  out  of  office. 


CHAPTER  XV 
CANALS  AND  BANKS 

IT  was  an  interesting  coincidence  that  at  the  very 
time  when  he  was  making  his  campaign  for  the 
Presidency,  in  which  he  met  with  disappointment 
and  defeat,  DeWitt  Clinton  was  engaged  in  another 
enterprise  which  was  destined  to  bring  him  after  years 
of  strife  far  more  distinction  than  he  could  probably 
have  won  in  the  White  House.  His  interest  in  the 
inland  transportation  systems  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
and  especially  in  canals,  may  be  regarded  as  an  inheri- 
tance. We  have  seen  what  attention  George  Clinton 
as  Governor  gave  to  the  subject,  and  how  frequently 
and  earnestly  he  pressed  upon  the  Legislature  the 
desirability  of  providing  for  navigation  between  the 
various  lake  systems  and  the  river  systems — most  of  all, 
perhaps,  between  the  Great  Lakes  and  the  Hudson. 
As  a  result  of  his  policy,  substantial  progress  was  made 
in  certain  directions.  But  the  greatest  undertaking  of 
all  was  left  to  be  effected  by  DeWitt  Clinton,  through 
years  of  strife. 

April  8,  1811,  was  an  epochal  day  in  the  history  of 
New  York.  On  that  day,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the 
Legislature  passed  an  act  appointing  a  commission  to 
take  into  consideration  all  matters  relating  to  inland 
navigation.  It  was  not  a  party  measure,  but  was  sup- 
ported by  the  best  men  of  both  parties,  and  both  parties 
were  represented  in  the  membership  of  the  commis- 

326 


1811]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  327 

sion.  The  nine  men  chosen  were  among  the  most 
eminent  in  the  State,  and  most  of  them  were  of  especial 
fitness  for  the  work  before  them.  They  were  Gouver- 
neur  Morris,  DeWitt  Clinton,  William  North,  Stephen 
Van  Rensselaer,  Simeon  DeWitt,  Thomas  Eddy,  Peter 
B.  Porter,  Robert  R.  Livingston,  and  Robert  Fulton. 
Less  than  four  years  before  Fulton,  who  had  perfected 
his  steamboat  under  the  patronage  of  Livingston,  sent 
his  "Clermont"  on  her  first  trip  from  New  York 
to  Albany;  a  year  later  John  Stevens  had  sent  the 
"Phoenix"  on  the  first  steam  voyage  at  sea,  from  New 
York  to  Philadelphia;  and  at  this  very  time  the 
steamer  "Paragon"  was  being  built  at  New  York. 
Obviously  a  new  era  in  navigation  was  dawning  upon 
the  world. 

This  commission  was  invested  with  great  powers. 
It  was  authorized  to  enter  into  negotiations  with  the 
national  government,  or  with  the  governments  of  other 
States,  to  secure  their  cooperation  in  the  grandiose  pro- 
ject of  opening  a  navigable  waterway  from  the  Atlantic 
Ocean  to  the  heart  of  the  continent  by  means  of  con- 
necting the  Hudson  River  with  the  Great  Lakes  by 
canal.  It  was  also  empowered  to  accept  subscriptions 
or  other  aid  from  individuals  or  corporations  to  the 
same  end.  Should  these  efforts  prove  insufficient  in 
results,  the  commission  was  to  ascertain  on  what  terms 
it  would  be  practicable  to  secure,  on  the  credit  of 
the  State,  a  loan  of  capital  for  the  execution  of  the 
gigantic  work.  It  was  apparent,  and  was  consistently 
urged  by  Clinton,  that  the  end  desired  could  be  attained 
only  by  means  of  a  canal  from  the  Hudson  to  Lake 


328  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1811 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Erie.  Canals  to  Lake  Champlain,  to  St.  Lawrence, 
and  to  Lake  Ontario  would  serve  some  useful  purposes, 
but  they  would  not  give  access  to  the  great  western 
lakes.  The  Niagara  Falls  were  in  the  way  of  getting 
from  Ontario  to  Erie  and  Huron  and  Michigan,  and 
as  yet  nobody  ventured  to  propose  such  a  canal  as  the 
Welland. 

Clinton  was  the  most  aggressive  member  of  the  com- 
mission, which  indeed  would  not  have  been  appointed 
but  for  his  urgings.  As  soon  as  the  appointment  was 
made  he  and  Morris  went  to  Washington  to  solicit 
the  aid  of  Congress.  They  did  not  venture  to  ask  for 
an  appropriation  of  money,  either  as  a  gift  or  a  loan; 
but  they  did  urge  the  granting  of  public  lands  in  aid 
of  the  scheme.  But  their  errand  was  in  vain.  It  was 
not  an  opportune  time,  Congress  thought,  for  such  an 
enterprise.  The  embargo  and  other  circumstances  had 
depressed  commerce  and  finance.  The  country  was 
likely  soon  to  be  at  war  with  Great  Britain.  And  any- 
way the  scheme  was  probably  impracticable.  Several 
New  York  Representatives  in  Congress  were  loud  in 
their  scorn  of  it  and  violent  in  their  denunciation  of 
its  projector. 

The  result  was  that  Congress  rather  curtly  and  most 
emphatically  refused  to  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
scheme,  and  Clinton  and  Morris  returned  to  New  York 
empty-handed.  Clinton  returned,  moreover,  to  find 
himself  made  the  target  of  such  volleys  of  ridicule  and 
abuse  as  few  men  have  had  to  endure.  Tammany  Hall 
particularly  raged  against  him  and  the  canal.  It 
declared  that  he  knew  the  thing  was  impossible,  and 


1812]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  329 

was  advocating  it  only  for  the  sake  of  notoriety  and 
political  advantage.  He  had  made  the  trip  to  Wash- 
ington at  public  expense,  it  insisted,  for  political  pur- 
poses. As  for  the  "ditch  from  the  Lakes  to  the  Sea," 
it  was  as  fantastically  impossible  as  a  ladder  to  the 
moon,  and  if  any  part  of  it  was  ever  dug  it  would  never 
serve  any  purpose  other  than  that  of  a  grave  to  bury 
its  mad  maker  in!  Thus  for  a  time  the  canal  project 
was  necessarily  held  in  abeyance,  and  seemed  defeated. 
There  came  up  at  the  same  time  in  an  aggravated 
form  a  question  which  had  already  caused  much 
scandal  in  the  State,  to-wit,  that  of  the  chartering  of 
banks.  We  have  already  seen  the  circumstances  in 
which  the  Manhattan  Bank  and  the  Merchants'  Bank 
of  New  York  City  had  come  into  existence,  and  the 
unspeakable  corruption  through  which  the  State  Bank 
was  established.  For  several  years  the  stench  of  this 
latter  scandal  was  so  great  that  nobody  ventured  to 
propose  the  chartering  of  another  bank.  But  in  1812 
such  a  proposal  was  made,  in  extraordinary  form. 
With  an  inkling  of  what  was  coming,  Governor  Tomp- 
kins  had  devoted  the  greater  part  of  his  unprece- 
dentedly  long  address  to  the  Legislature  to  that  subject 
Referring  to  the  fact  that  petitions  were  about  to  be 
presented  for  the  chartering  of  new  banks  with  aggre- 
gate capital  of  eighteen  and  a  half  millions  of  dollars, 
he  suggested  that  enough  banks  had  already  been 
organized,  and  that  such  further  increase  of  them 
might  prove  disastrous  to  the  State.  He  dwelt  upon 
the  evils  of  financial  speculation,  and  of  the  inflated 
expectations  which  promoters  of  banks  too  often 


330  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

aroused;  upon  the  bad  influence  of  amassed  and  con- 
centrated wealth;  the  increased  facilities  for  counter- 
feiting; the  abuse  of  credit;  the  evil  of  exempting  so 
large  an  amount  of  property  from  taxation,  and  the 
danger  of  unfavorable  reflection  upon  the  integrity  of 
public  men. 

Despite  these  arguments  of  the  Governor,  the  bank 
schemes  went  forward.  The  Bank  of  the  United 
States  had  failed  to  secure  from  Congress  a  renewal 
of  its  charter,  and  the  result  was  that  its  stockholders 
had  returned  to  them  a  large  amount  of  uninvested 
capital.  It  was  their  purpose  to  reinvest  this  in 
another  bank,  in  New  York,  which  city  was  by  this 
time  clearly  destined  to  be  the  financial  metropolis  of 
the  United  States.  They  therefore  asked  for  a  charter 
of  an  institution  to  be  known  as  the  Bank  of  America, 
with  six  million  dollars  capital;  its  name  and  the 
amount  of  its  capital  indicating  its  national  scope. 
Their  two  chief  agents  in  the  promotion  of  the  scheme 
were  David  Thomas  and  Solomon  Southwick.  Mr. 
Thomas  was  a  veteran  member  of  the  Anti-Federalist 
or  Democratic  party,  who  had  faithfully  and  efficiently 
served  as  member  of  Assembly,  State  Treasurer,  and 
Representative  in  Congress.  Mr.  Southwick,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  was  the  editor  of  the  Democratic 
organ  at  Albany,  a  man  of  singular  personal  charm, 
and  the  devoted  friend  of  DeWitt  Clinton. 

The  Assembly  on  February  2,  1812,  appointed  Wil- 
liam W.  Gilbert,  Johannes  Bruyn,  Henry  Yates,  and 
Francis  A.  Bloodgood  members  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment — all  supporters  of  DeWitt  Clinton. 


1812]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  331 

Three  days  later  it  elected  David  Thomas,  the  agent 
of  the  bank  promoters,  to  be  Treasurer  of  the  State. 
Securing  election  by  the  Senate  also,  Mr.  Thomas 
promptly  entered  upon  that  office,  to  the  great  advan- 
tage of  the  bank  scheme.  Then  the  demand  for  a 
charter  for  the  Bank  of  America  was  made. 

Seldom  has  a  more  unblushingly  offensive  proposal 
been  made  to  a  governing  body.  The  State  Bank  had 
secured  its  charter  by  the  bribery  of  individual  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature.  This  one  sought  to  secure 
its  charter  by  collective  bribery  of  the  State  of  New 
York.  It  purposed  to  devote  to  that  end  ten  per  cent, 
of  its  entire  capital  of  six  million  dollars.  If  the  State 
would  give  it  a  charter,  it  would  give  $400,000  to  the 
common  school  fund  and  $100,000  to  the  literature 
fund;  and  it  would  pay  $100,000  more  into  the 
treasury  of  the  State  at  the  end  of  twenty  years,  if  in 
that  time  no  other  bank  had  received  a  charter.  In 
addition,  the  bank  would  loan  a  million  dollars  to  the 
State  for  canals,  and  another  million  to  the  farmers 
of  the  State.  This  astounding  scheme  was  commended 
to  the  public  by  an  army  of  touts,  and  was  pressed 
upon  the  Legislature  by  such  an  organized  lobby  as 
never  had  been  seen  before,  and  which  has  scarcely 
been  surpassed  since,  even  in  the  wildest  heyday  of 
the  "'Black  Horse  Cavalry." 

Of  course  it  was  vigorously  opposed.  Governor 
Tompkins  threw  all  his  influence  against  it.  Ambrose 
Spencer,  though  a  strong  Democrat  and  the  brother- 
in-law  of  Clinton,  was  passionately  outspoken  against 
it,  and  became  on  that  account  Clinton's  bitter  personal 


332  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

foe.  John  Tayler,  who  as  a  State  Senator  had,  as  we 
have  hitherto  seen,  so  powerfully  contributed  to  the 
election  of  Tompkins  as  Governor,  was  also  aggressive 
in  his  opposition  to  the  bank.  But  both  Spencer  and 
Tayler  were  in  a  measure  handicapped  by  the  fact  that 
the  former  was  a  large  stockholder  in  the  Manhattan 
Bank  and  the  State  Bank,  and  the  latter  was  president 
of  the  State  Bank;  and  they  were  therefore  plausibly 
and  perhaps  truthfully  charged  with  being  moved  by 
selfish  purposes.  Erastus  Root,  a  new  member  of  the 
State  Senate,  made  some  powerful  speeches  against  the 
scheme,  though  he  had  formerly  prostituted  his  splen- 
did talents  to  the  defense  of  similar  iniquities. 

Despite  this  opposition,  however,  the  bill  for 
chartering  the  bank  was  steadily  advanced,  and  pres- 
ently its  enacting  clause  was  passed  in  the  Assembly 
by  a  vote  of  52  to  46.  Then,  before  the  remaining 
clauses  were  taken  up,  explicit  charges  were  made  of 
attempted  bribery.  Casper  M.  Rouse,  Senator  from 
Chenango  county,  declared  that  David  Thomas  had 
offered  him  for  his  vote  ten  shares  of  bank  stock,  with  a 
profit  of  a  thousand  dollars,  and  had  asked  him  to 
close  the  bargain  with  Solomon  Southwick.  Alexander 
Sheldon,  the  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  made  a  similar 
charge  against  Southwick.  On  the  charges,  Thomas 
and  Southwick  were  both  indicted,  but  the  cases  against 
them  failed,  partly  because  of  lack  of  other  testimony 
against  them  than  that  of  their  accusers,  which  of 
course  they  both  denied,  and  partly  because  their 
accusers  had  subsequently  to  the  date  of  the  alleged 
attempts  at  bribery  continued  cordial  relations  with 


1812]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  333 

them  and  had  actually  voted  for  Thomas  for  State 
Treasurer  and  for  Southwick  for  Regent  of  the  State 
University.  Various  other  agents  of  the  bank  were 
also  indicted  for  similar  offenses,  and  some  of  them 
were  convicted.  One,  formerly  a  clergyman,  was  sent 
to  the  penitentiary. 

It  may  be  recalled  that  when  revelations  of  corrup- 
tion were  made  in  the  case  of  the  Merchants'  Bank,  the 
number  of  supporters  of  that  enterprise  was  actually 
increased,  as  though  bribery  were  a  recommendation  of 
it.  It  is  a  grim  reflection  upon  the  legislative  ethics  of 
that  time  that  such  was  the  case  also  with  the  Bank  of 
America.  After  these  accusations  of  bribery,  the  truth 
of  which  was  widely  believed,  support  for  the  bill 
increased,  and  the  remaining  clauses  were  passed  by 
the  Assembly  by  a  vote  of  58  to  39. 

The  bill  then  went  to  the  Senate,  where  there  was 
every  prospect  of  its  speedy  passage.  Erastus  Root 
thundered  against  it,  and  those  who  looked  to  Clinton 
for  guidance  found  him  silent  in  circumstances  which 
reversed  the  familiar  rule  and  made  silence  denote  dis- 
sent. Clinton  was  indeed  at  heart  as  much  opposed  to 
the  bill,  and  to  the  chartering  of  any  new  bank,  as  was 
his  brother-in-law,  Ambrose  Spencer;  and  for  the  same 
reason,  namely,  his  personal  interest  in  existing  banks. 
He  told  Spencer  frankly  that  such  was  the  case,  but 
added  that  he  would  not  say  so  publicly  and  would 
not  be  drawn  into  the  contest  on  either  side.  Thus  it 
was  because  of  Clinton's  silence  and  not  because  of 
any  advocacy  of  the  bank,  that  Spencer  quarreled  with 
him. 


334  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  first  trial  of  strength  in  the  Senate  was  on  a 
motion  in  committee  of  the  whole  to  reject  the  bill. 
This  motion  was  defeated,  by  a  vote  of  13  to  15. 
Besides,  the  chairman,  E.  P.  Livingston,  who  had  not 
voted,  was  known  to  be  against  the  motion  to  reject 
and  in  favor  of  the  bank.  It  was  practically  certain, 
therefore,  that  the  bill  chartering  the  bank  would  pass 
the  Senate,  as  it  had  already  passed  the  House. 

Then  the  Governor  intervened.  On  March  27,  as 
already  recorded,  he  prorogued  the  Legislature  until 
May  21. 

We  have  hitherto  referred  to  the  two  motives  which 
have  been  ascribed  to  Mr.  Tompkins  for  that  extraor- 
dinary action.  That  which  was  expressed  in  his  mes- 
sage of  prorogation  was  to  secure  time  for  reflection 
upon  the  bank  controversy,  and  to  investigate  the 
scandalous  charges  of  corruption  which  had  been 
made.  The  other,  unexpressed  but  widely  attributed 
to  him,  probably  with  much  truth,  was  a  desire  to  inter- 
fere with  DeWitt  Clinton's  campaign  for  the  Presi- 
dency and  to  defeat  him  in  that  ambition.  The  latter 
was  not  a  worthy  motive,  but  it  was  successful.  The 
former  was  worthy  and  commendable  in  a  high  degree, 
but  it  failed. 

After  referring  to  the  large  capital  already  invested 
in  banking,  and  its  adequacy  to  commercial  purposes, 
and  also  to  the  prospect  of  a  war  with  Great  Britain, 
the  Governor  said: 

"Can  it  be  wise  to  increase  our  banking  capital  in 
an  unprecedented  manner,  at  a  time  when  we  have  only 
a  very  limited  and  restricted  commerce  left?  Can  it 


1812]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  335 

be  prudent  or  safe  at  such  a  time  to  employ  British 
capital  and  subject  ourselves  to  its  deleterious  influence 
in  thwarting  the  operations  of  our  own  government?" 

But  even  these  considerations  became  less  important 
in  view  of  others.  He  continued : 

"It  appears,  by  the  journals  of  the  Assembly,  that 
attempts  have  been  made  to  corrupt,  by  bribes,  four 
members  of  that  body,  to  vote  for  the  passage  of  the 
bill  to  incorporate  the  aforesaid  bank;  and  it  also 
appears  by  the  journals  of  the  Senate  that  an  improper 
attempt  has  been  made  to  influence  one  of  the  Senators. 
.  .  .  Should  its  final  passage  now  take  place,  before 
the  persons  implicated  in  holding  out  the  above-men- 
tioned inducements  shall  have  been  judicially  tried,  and 
without  consulting  the  feelings  and  opinions  of  the  com- 
munity at  large  upon  the  subject,  public  sentiment  will, 
I  fear,  however  unjustly,  attribute  its  passage,  in  some 
degree,  to  the  influence  of  such  inducements." 

That  was  logical,  honorable,  manly,  patriotic.  But 
it  was,  unhappily,  ineffective.  The  storm  that  rose 
against  it  was  ferocious.  Members  of  both  houses 
raged  against  it,  as  though  a  coup  d'etat  had  been 
attempted,  and  many  of  them  before  leaving  Albany 
signed  and  published  a  formal  protest  against  it. 
Of  course  Southwick's  paper  raged  against  it.  Clin- 
ton remained  silent,  with  the  proverbial  "mingled 
emotions."  As  a  blow  against  the  bank,  he  secretly 
rejoiced  in  it.  As  a  deadly  blow  at  his  own  Presi- 
dential schemes,  he  execrated  it. 

During  the  recess  of  the  Legislature  the  April  elec- 
tions occurred,  resulting  in  some  Federalist  gains  but 


336  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

leaving  both  houses  under  Democratic  control.  The 
elections  gave  little  indication  of  popular  feeling  toward 
the  bank,  save  that  in  Otsego  county  the  Democratic 
county  convention  recommended  to  the  district  con- 
vention the  nomination  of  E.  H.  Metcalf  for  State 
Senator,  and  the  district  convention  rejected  him  for 
the  sole  reason  that,  while  a  most  worthy  and  estimable 
man  in  all  other  respects,  he  had  voted  in  the  Assembly 
for  the  Bank  bill. 

During  the  recess,  also,  plans  were  formulated  for 
defeating  the  Bank  bill  in  the  Council  of  Revision, 
which  would  have  the  power  of  vetoing  it  and  over 
whose  veto  of  it  the  Legislature  might  not  be  able  to 
pass  it.  The  Council  consisted  of  seven  members, 
including  the  Governor,  and  it  was  believed  that  four 
would  approve  and  three  would  disapprove  the  bill. 
That  would  mean  its  approval.  But  if  two  more  mem- 
bers could  be  added,  both  of  whom  were  opposed  to  the 
bank,  the  bill  might  be  killed.  So  a  petition  was 
presented  to  the  Council  of  Appointment  praying  for 
the  appointment  of  two  additional  Justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court  and  for  their  "immediate  appoint- 
ment" in  order  that  they  might  "arrest  and  prevent 
the  passage  of  a  bill  before  the  Legislature  entitled  'An 
Act  to  Incorporate  the  Bank  of  America.'  '  This  peti- 
tion was  "not  intended  for  general  circulation,  but  was 
to  be  presented  to  influential  Republicans  (Democrats) 
only."  Whether  it  was  ever  presented  to  the  Council 
of  Appointment  is  uncertain.  Probably  it  was  not. 
Certainly  it  was  not  acted  upon  by  that  body. 


ROBERT  FULTON 

Robert  Fulton,  inventor;  born  in  Little  Britain,  Pa.,  1765; 
studied  painting;  made  success  as  miniature  painter  in  Lon- 
don; began  experiments  in  mechanics  and  engineering;  made 
experiments  on  the  Seine  with  a  boat  for  submarine  naviga- 
tion, 1796;  made  experiments  with  torpedoes  in  United  States, 
1806;  launched  first  attempt  at  a  steamboat,  1803;  the  Cler- 
mont,  his  steamboat,  started  on  a  trip  on  the  Hudson  August 
11,  1807;  Fulton  died  in  New  York  City,  February  24,  1815. 


1812]  CANALS  AND  BANKS  337 

The  Legislature  reassembled  on  May  21,  and  the 
Senate  immediately  resumed  consideration  of  the  bank 
charter.  Erastus  Root  was  its  chief  opponent,  and 
Morgan  Lewis  its  principal  advocate.  At  the  end  of 
a  week  it  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  seventeen  to  thirteen. 
All  the  Federalists  voted  for  it,  as  they  had,  with  a 
single  exception — that  of  Mr.  Lorillard,  of  New  York, 
—in  the  Assembly. 

While  these  discreditable  performances  were  going 
on,  a  work  of  the  highest  beneficence  was  also  being 
promoted.  On  February  17,  1812,  the  Commission  on 
Common  Schools,  which  had  been  appointed  in  the  pre- 
ceding year,  submitted  a  most  interesting  and  valuable 
report,  saying  truly  at  its  beginning:  "Perhaps  there 
never  will  be  presented  to  the  Legislature  a  subject  of 
more  importance  than  the  establishment  of  common 
schools."  After  arguing  the  importance  of  popular 
education,  the  report  recommended  the  establishment 
of  common  schools,  under  the  direction  and  patronage 
of  the  State,  in  which  should  be  taught  reading,  writ- 
ing, arithmetic,  and  the  principles  of  morality.  The 
plan  proposed  that  all  towns  be  divided  into  school 
districts,  with  a  school  in  each  under  the  care  of  trustees 
elected  by  the  people  of  the  district;  that  the  income 
from  the  State  school  fund  be  apportioned  among  the 
districts  according  to  their  school  population  ;  that  each 
town  raise  by  local  taxation  a  sum  equal  to  that  appor- 
tioned to  it  by  the  State;  that  all  such  monies,  State 
and  local,  be  devoted  to  paying  the  salaries  of  teachers, 
the  other  expenses  being  otherwise  provided  for;  and 
that  the  whole  system  be  under  the  charge  of  a  State 


338  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Superintendent.  The  report  further  gave  much  atten- 
tion to  ways  and  means  of  increasing  the  school  fund, 
the  qualification  of  teachers,  and  the  courses  of  study. 

As  a  consequence  of  this  report  the  Legislature 
passed  chapter  232  of  the  Laws  of  New  York,  which 
was  enacted  on  June  19,  1812,  and  which,  as  stated  in 
the  preceding  chapter,  was  the  foundation  of  the 
present  common  school  system  of  the  State. 

At  the  same  session  of  the  Legislature  the  Assembly 
committee  to  which  had  been  referred  the  Governor's 
recommendation  for  an  abatement  of  the  provisions 
for  corporeal  and  capital  punishment,  which  he 
described  as  a  "vestige  of  barbarism,"  made  its  report. 
It  strongly  opposed  any  such  lessening  of  the  severity  of 
the  laws,  holding  that  "capital  punishments  are  both 
expedient  and  necessary,  and  therefore  justifiable,"  and 
that  they  were  in  this  State  attached  to  as  few  crimes  as 
was  consistent  with  individual  security  and  public 
safety. 


CHAPTER  XVI 
PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME 

CICERO — or  was  it  Caius  Marius? — may  have 
been  right  in  declaring  that  "Silent  leges  inter 
arma" ';  but  if  he  had  been  speaking  in  the  day  of 
which  we  are  writing  he  must  have  added,  "Sed  non 
factiones."  Amid  arms  the  laws  may  be  silent;  but  at 
this  time  factions  assuredly  were  not.  It  was  the 
shame  of  America  in  its  early  years  that  political  parti- 
sanship often  dominated  its  diplomacy,  and  even 
intruded  its  pernicious  influence  into  the  conduct  of 
war  against  a  foreign  foe.  Such  was  the  case  in  New 
York  during  our  second  war  with  Great  Britain.  That 
war  was,  indeed,  in  its  inception  largely  an  affair  of 
party  passion.  When  we  recall  the  rabid  utterances  of 
Jefferson  and  Clay,  the  insane  folly  of  which  was  soon 
to  be  disastrously  demonstrated  on  fields  of  defeat  and 
disgrace,  we  must  agree  with  the  mordant  reproach  of 
Randolph  of  Roanoke:  "Agrarian  cupidity,  not  mari- 
time right,  urges  the  war."  Thus  begun,  the  war  was 
conducted  to  the  end  amid  conflicts  of  domestic  faction 
at  times  approaching  sedition  and  treason. 

Nowhere,  unless  in  some  parts  of  New  England,  was 
the  anti-war  spirit  stronger  than  in  New  York. 
Nowhere,  not  even  in  Virginia  and  Kentucky,  was  the 
war  spirit  stronger  or  more  rampant.  The  Federalists 
were  of  course  the  anti-war  party,  and  their  attitude 
was  far  more  logical,  patriotic,  and  convincing  than  that 

339 


340  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

of  the  opponents  of  the  war  elsewhere.  With  impreg- 
nable truth  and  justice  they  charged  responsibility  for 
the  circumstances  which  caused  the  war  against  the 
pacifist  policy  of  Jefferson,  and  particularly  against  his 
unwillingness  that  the  United  States  should  have  a 
navy.  An  efficient  navy,  rather  than  an  embargo,  was 
what  had  been  needed.  A  score  of  "Old  Ironsides" 
under  captains  like  Hull  and  Perry  would  have  ended 
impressment  in  short  order  and  would  have  kept  us  out 
of  war.  Such  was  the  contention  of  the  New  York 
Federalists,  and  in  it  they  were  everlastingly  right; 
though  of  course  even  that  fact  was  no  justification  of 
any  acts  or  words  calculated  to  embarrass  or  to  handicap 
the  national  government  when  once  it  was,  unfortu- 
nately, involved  in  that  war. 

The  Democrats  were,  on  the  other  hand,  the  war 
party,  and  for  the  time  they  were  united  in  support  of 
the  government.  The  growing  antagonism  between 
Clinton  and  Tompkins  was  held  in  abeyance.  So  in  a 
measure  was  the  still  stronger  enmity  between  Clinton 
and  President  Madison.  It  was  doubtless  with  reluc- 
tance that  Clinton  gave  his  support  to  the  President. 
But  even  in  his  often  blind  and  willful  arrogance  he 
realized  that  for  the  time  he  had  no  alternative.  Oppo- 
sition to  the  administration  would  have  meant  political 
suicide.  For  a  strong  racial  influence  had  arisen.  The 
suppression  of  the  Irish  Rebellion  of  1798,  followed  by 
the  Irish  Union  with  Great  Britain  in  1800,  had  caused 
an  important  migration  of  Irishmen  to  America,  the 
great  majority  of  whom  settled  in  New  York.  They 
were  naturally  intensely  anti-British  in  sentiment,  and 


1812]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  341 

therefore  enthusiastic  supporters  of  the  war.  Clinton 
himself  was  of  Irish  ancestry,  and  had  inherited  a  large 
measure  of  the  hatred  of  England  that  had  character- 
ized his  uncle  George.  Nothing  was  more  logical,  then, 
than  that  he  should  seek  to  become  the  leader  of  the 
steadily  growing  Irish  element  in  New  York  politics. 

The  second  meeting  of  the  Thirty-sixth  Legislature 
opened  at  Albany  on  January  12,  1813,  and  lasted  until 
April  13,  when  it  adjourned  without  day.  The 
numerous  communications  from  the  Governor  related 
chiefly  to  military  matters.  As  the  Federalists  had  a 
majority  in  the  Assembly,  they  were  able  to  elect  a  new 
Council  of  Appointment,  consisting  of  Jonas  Platt, 
Peter  W.  Radcliff,  and  John  Stearns,  Federalists,  and 
James  W.  Wilkin,  Democrat,  the  last  named  being 
chosen  because  there  was  no  Federalist  Senator  from  the 
Middle  district.  The  relationship  between  Clinton 
and  the  Federalists  made  it  certain,  however,  that  none 
of  his  friends  would  be  turned  out  of  office  by  the  Fed- 
eralist Council. 

That  relationship  was  suspected,  and  indeed  openly 
charged  by  Clinton's  Democratic  opponents,  with  play- 
ing a  decisive  part  in  the  election  of  a  United  States 
Senator  to  succeed  John  Smith,  whose  term  expired  on 
March  4.  As  there  was  a  Democratic  majority  on  a 
joint  ballot  of  the  two  houses,  it  was  naturally  expected 
that  a  Democrat  would  be  chosen,  and  James  W. 
Wilkin,  State  Senator  from  Orange  county  and  the 
only  Democratic  member  of  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment, was  regularly  nominated  as  the  candidate  of  that 
party.  Rufus  King  was  put  forward  by  the  Federalists. 


342  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1812 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

On  joint  ballot  King  received  68  votes  and  Wilkin  61, 
and  there  were  three  blank  ballots;  and  Mr.  King  was 
therefore  elected.  Even  if  the  blank  ballots  had  been 
cast  for  Mr.  Wilkin,  he  would  have  failed  to  receive 
a  majority.  It  was  thus  obvious  that  a  number  of 
Democrats  had  voted  for  the  Federalist  candidate,  but 
just  who  they  were  was  never  disclosed. 

The  Tammany  men  of  New  York  City,  who  were  at 
this  time  almost  solidly  arrayed  against  Clinton,  openly 
charged  that  he  had  directed  his  supporters  in  the  Leg- 
islature to  vote  for  King  in  fulfillment  of  a  bargain 
which  they  said  he  had  made  with  the  Federalists  in 
1812,  under  which  the  Federalists  voted  for  Clintonian 
Presidential  Electors.  The  followers  of  Clinton  vigor- 
ously denied  this,  and  declared  that  the  "selling  out" 
of  Mr.  Wilkin  was  the  result  of  a  bargain  made  by 
Messrs.  Thomas  and  Southwick  in  their  campaign  for 
the  Bank  of  America,  when  they  promised  Democratic 
votes  for  a  Federalist  Senator  in  return  for  Federalist 
support  for  the  bank  scheme.  Positive  proof  or  dis- 
proof of  either  story  was  never  adduced;  but  it  was 
significant  that  Mr.  Wilkin  himself  declared  his  utter 
disbelief  in  the  former  and  his  equally  positive  con- 
viction of  the  truth  of  the  latter  version. 

The  1812  Council  of  Appointment  as  its  last  act  in 
January,  1813,  appointed  Gideon  Hawley,  a  young 
lawyer  of  Albany,  to  be  the  first  State  Superintendent 
of  Schools.  His  salary  in  that  office  was  only  three 
hundred  dollars  a  year.  But  being  a  man  of  high 
ideals  and  devotion  to  the  public  service,  he  did  his 
work  as  well  as  though  his  remuneration  had  been  ten 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  343 

times  as  great,  and  thus  became  the  organizer  of  the 
common  school  system  of  the  State,  performing  one 
of  the  finest  pieces  of  constructive  and  administrative 
work  for  the  public  interest  in  New  York's  history. 

The  new  Council  of  Appointment  met  for  the  first 
time  on  February  8,  and  at  once  vindicated  the  con- 
fidence which  Clinton  felt  in  its  friendliness.  Its  first 
act  was  the  reappointment  of  him  as  Mayor  of  New 
York.  The  motion  for  that  act  was  made  by  Senator 
Platt,  the  same  distinguished  lawyer  and  Federalist 
leader  who  had  been  the  Federalist  candidate  for  Gov- 
ernor in  1807,  and  had  then  been  defeated  by  DeWitt 
Clinton's  candidate,  Daniel  D.  Tompkins.  At  that 
time  Platt  and  Clinton  had  been  the  strongest  of  politi- 
cal opponents.  Yet  in  1812  Platt  used  all  his  influence 
in  behalf  of  Clinton  for  the  Presidency,  and  in  1813 
successfully  moved  for  his  reappointment  to  the  highly 
lucrative  and  influential  office  of  Mayor  of  New  York. 
The  only  vote  against  this  reappointment  was  that  of 
Peter  W.  Radcliff,  who  was  presumably  actuated  by 
personal  motives  in  opposing  Clinton.  His  brother, 
Jacob  Radcliff,  had  been  made  Mayor  in  1810  in  place 
of  Clinton,  and  a  year  later  had  been  turned  out  of 
office  to  let  Clinton  in  again.  Because  of  his  course 
in  this  and  some  other  matters,  Mr.  Radcliff  largely 
lost  the  confidence  of  his  party  associates  and  his 
influence  as  a  party  leader. 

The  next  important  contest  in  the  Council  was 
over  the  Attorney-Generalship.  In  August,  1812.  the 
incumbent,  M.  B.  Hildreth,  had  died,  and  Thomas 
Addis  Emmet,  the  eminent  Irish  patriot,  who  had 


344  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

come  to  America  some  years  before,  was  appointed  to 
the  place.  In  February,  1813,  Mr.  Platt  moved  that 
he  be  not  reappointed.  This  was  a  direct  reversal  of 
policy,  since  Mr.  Emmet  was  one  of  Clinton's  closest 
friends,  whom  the  latter  counted  upon  to  hold  the  Irish 
voters  of  New  York  City  solid  in  their  support  of  him. 
Mr.  Platt's  action  looked,  therefore,  much  like  a 
breaking  of  whatever  understanding  there  had  been 
between  him  and  Clinton.  Mr.  Radcliff  again  opposed 
Mr.  Platt's  motion,  though  he  would  not  vote  upon  it 
at  all,  thus  reversing  his  own  attitude,  since  he  had 
refused  to  vote  for  Clinton  but  now  refused  to  vote 
against  Clinton's  friend.  Mr.  Stearns  voted  with  Mr. 
Platt.  while  the  Governor  and  Mr.  Wilkin  voted 
against  the  motion.  Apparently  the  vote  was  a  tie,  but 
it  was  held  that  the  Governor's  vote  did  not  count 
since  he  was  entitled  to  vote  only  in  case  of  a  tie  of 
the  Council,  and  in  this  case  there  was  no  tie,  for  two 
had  voted  Aye  and  only  one  Nay,  the  fourth  member 
not  voting.  Mr.  Emmet  was  therefore  removed  from 
office,  and  Abraham  Van  Vechten  was  elected  in  his 
place. 

From  this  the  Council,  under  the  lead  of  Mr.  Platt, 
went  on  to  make  another  pretty  clean  sweep  of  offices, 
particularly  of  those  which  had  good  salaries  attached 
to  them,  though  it  generally  filled  them  with  excellent 
men.  Thus  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck  was  removed  from 
the  Recordship  of  New  York  and  J.  Ogden  Hoffman 
was  appointed  in  his  place.  This  was  not,  however,  a 
blow  to  Clinton,  since  Mr.  Hoffman,  though  a  Fed- 
eralist, had  favored  Clinton's  reappointment  as  Mayor. 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  345 

The  Legislature,  also,  made  a  change  in  the  only  office 
at  its  disposal,  that  of  State  Treasurer,  and  although 
it  had  a  Democratic  majority  on  joint  ballot  it  elected 
Charles  Z.  Platt,  a  Federalist,  in  place  of  David 
Thomas.  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  was  done 
because  of  Mr.  Thomas's  activity  in  the  matter  of  the 
Bank  of  America  and  the  charges  of  bribery  that  had 
been  preferred  against  him. 

The  early  part  of  this  year  witnessed  the  practical 
elimination  of  the  Livingston  family  from  leader- 
ship in  New  York  politics,  through  the  removal  of  its 
chief  members.  Robert  R.  Livingston  died  on  Janu- 
ary 28,  after  rendering  services  to  steam  navigation  and 
to  agriculture  comparable  in  beneficence  to  those 
which  he  had  performed  in  the  exalted  public 
offices  that  he  had  filled.  Edward  Livingston  had 
removed  to  Louisiana,  and  Brockholst  Livingston  had 
gone  upon  the  Supreme  Court  bench  at  Washington. 
The  remaining  members  of  the  family,  and  members 
by  marriages,  were  unable  to  maintain  the  authority 
that  had  formerly  been  exercised,  and  thus  another 
long  step  was  taken  toward  the  freeing  of  the  State 
from  family  or  clan  control.  , 

The  bank  controversy  of  the  preceding  year  was 
revived  by  the  request  of  the  Bank  of  America  for  a 
modification  of  the  charter  which  it  had  obtained  and 
for  a  very  radical  modification  of  the  terms  on  which 
that  charter  was  granted.  It  had  asked  to  be  author- 
ized to  have  a  capital  of  six  millions.  It  now  asked 
for  a  large  reduction  of  that  amount,  which  the  Legis- 
lature granted.  It  also  asked  to  be  relieved  from  pay- 


346  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ing  the  $600,000  bonus — or  bribe,  as  many  called  it— 
which  it  had  offered  in  consideration  of  the  granting 
of  the  charter;  its  plea  being  that  if  it  were  bound  to 
pay  such  a  sum  nobody  would  subscribe  for  its  stock. 
This  was  a  discreditable  bit  of  what  sportsmen  call 
"welching,"  and  it  was  roundly  denounced  by  all  the 
opponents  of  the  bank.  Nevertheless  the  Legislature 
granted  the  request  to  the  extent  of  releasing  the  bank 
from  the  obligation  excepting  to  the  extent  of  a  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars,  which  it  was  required  to  pay 
to  the  common  school  fund.  It  was  freely  charged 
that  this  action  by  the  Legislature  was  secured  by  the 
bank  through  corrupt  methods,  but  no  indictments  or 
prosecution  of  any  kind  ensued. 

The  paramount  issue  of  the  year  in  politics  was,  how- 
ever, the  succession  to  the  Governorship.  Mr.  Tomp- 
kins's  second  term  was  drawing  to  a  close,  and  it  was  no 
secret  that  he  desired  a  third,  to  be  a  stepping-stone 
to  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States.  There  was  in 
the  Democratic  party  no  serious  thought  of  any  other 
candidate.  No  doubt  Clinton  regarded  with  resent- 
ment the  continued  political  prosperity  of  the  man 
whom  he  looked  upon  as  his  own  creation,  and  whom 
he  doubtless  regarded  as  an  ingrate  if  not  a  traitor. 
But  Tompkins's  well  deserved  popularity  was  so  great 
and  so  substantial  that  even  in  his  utmost  arrogance 
Clinton  did  not  venture  to  oppose  him.  The  usual 
caucus  of  the  Democratic  members  of  the  Legislature 
was  held,  as  a  nominating  convention,  on  February  4; 
but,  as  usual,  only  a  small  number  attended.  There 
were  only  forty-eight,  nearly  all  from  outside  of  New 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  347 

York  City.  Presumably  the  reason  for  this  abstention 
of  members  was,  in  great  part,  the  hostility  of  Tam- 
many Hall  to  that  method  of  nomination.  That  organ- 
ization had  strongly  committed  itself  to  the  practice 
which  afterward  prevailed,  of  calling  a  State  conven- 
tion specially  constituted  for  the  purpose  of  making 
nominations  for  State  offices. 

The  caucus  was  harmonious  and  unanimous  in 
renominating  Tompkins  for  the  Governorship.  Over 
the  Lieutenant-Governorship  there  was  decided  differ- 
ence in  opinion.  Clinton  was  holding  that  office,  and 
his  friends  urged  that  he  should  be  renominated.  as 
Tompkins  had  been.  Against  this  Ambrose  Spencer 
vigorously  protested.  Martin  Van  Buren,  one  of  the 
most  influential  men  in  the  caucus  and  the  one  chosen 
to  draft  the  party  platform,  was  looked  to  by  Clinton 
to  be  his  spokesman  and  champion.  But  that  astute 
politician  had  a  fine  gift  for  anticipating  "which  way 
the  cat  would  jump,"  and  obviously  realized  that 
Clinton  was  doomed  to  rejection.  He  did  not  openly 
oppose  him,  as  Spencer  did,  but  he  did  not  support  him, 
and  probably  exerted  some  quiet  and  private  influ- 
ence against  him.  There  is  reason  for  suspecting  that 
the  Governor  also,  though  of  course  not  a  member 
of  the  caucus,  used  some  personal  influence  against 
Clinton.  The  outcome  of  the  voting  in  the  caucus  was 
that  John  Tayler  received  thirty-two  votes  and  was 
accordingly  nominated,  while  Clinton  received  pre- 
cisely half  that  number. 

There  was  no  ground  for  challenging  the  vote,  and 
the  elimination  of  Clinton  from  official  life  seemed  to 


348  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

be  assured.  But  such  a  result  was  not  to  be  acquiesced 
in  meekly  by  that  indomitable  fighter  and  his  devoted 
friends.  He  did  not,  it  is  true,  openly  bolt  the  party. 
That  would  have  been  fatal.  But  forty-one  of  his 
friends,  led  by  Obadiah  German  and  Philip  Van  Cort- 
landt,  held  a  meeting  and  issued  an  address  to  the  party 
and  the  voters  of  the  State,  which  in  style  and  spirit 
was  so  unmistakably  like  Clinton  that  it  was  a  most 
reasonable  assumption  that  he  was  himself  the  author 
of  it.  This  remarkable  document  began  with  the 
Presidential  campaign  of  the  preceding  year  and 
reviewed  it  and  the  course  of  the  national  administra- 
tion in  a  manner  most  unfavorable  to  Madison.  It 
reviewed  in  like  fashion  the  administration  of  Governor 
Tompkins.  Finally,  it  protested  against  the  election 
of  the  Democratic  ticket,  declaring  that  Tompkins  and 
Tayler  were  both  mere  tools  of  the  Federal  admin- 
istration at  Washington;  a  charge  which  received  color 
from  the  fact  that  in  the  platform  upon  which  those 
gentlemen  had  been  nominated  Van  Buren  had  made 
a  most  elaborate  and  impassioned  defense  and  eulogy 
of  Madison's  administration. 

This  was  a  direct  appeal  to  Democrats  to  bolt  their 
party  ticket  and  to  vote  for  the  Federalist  candidates. 
The  latter  were  not,  however,  well  chosen.  Stephen 
Van  Rensselaer  was  the  candidate  for  Governor,  and 
George  Huntington,  of  Oneida  county,  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor.  They  had  been  nominated  on  February  1 1 
at  a  convention  consisting  not  only  of  the  Federalist 
members  of  the  Legislature  but  also  of  numerous  other 
citizens,  with  Judge  Egbert  Benson  as  chairman  and 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP   IN  WAR  TIME  349 

Daniel  Parrish  as  secretary — a  combination  of  legisla- 
tive caucus  and  popular  convention.  They  were  men 
of  good  character  and  ability.  But  Van  Rensselaer  had 
made  an  egregiously  poor  record  in  the  war.  He  had 
been  in  command  at  Fort  Niagara  as  a  major-general 
of  militia,  and  had  there  suffered  a  disastrous  and 
indeed  disgraceful  defeat,  which  led  James  Monroe 
to  declare  him  "weak  and  incompetent,"  and  Jeffer- 
son to  say  that  he  ought  to  be  "broke  for  incapacity." 
It  was,  of  course,  no  uncommon  thing  for  army  officers, 
both  militia  and  regular,  to  display  incompetence  and 
cowardice  in  that  war.  But  such  conduct  did  not  com- 
mend a  man  to  the  voters  of  the  State. 

Still,  the  Federalists  confidently  expected  success, 
and  the  Democrats  were  fearful  of  defeat.  The 
schism  of  Clinton's  forty-one  supporters  was  alarm- 
ing. Against  Van  Rensselaer's  poor  record  at  Fort 
Niagara  a  score  of  blunders  by  the  administration  at 
Washington  could  be  named.  Down  to  the  very  day 
of  election  the  shrewdest  political  observers  in  both 
parties  looked  for  the  defeat  of  Tompkins,  though  it 
does  not  appear  that  the  Governor  himself  feared  it. 
He  had  confidence  in  himself,  and  his  confidence  was 
justified.  New  York  City,  Albany,  Hudson,  and  other 
centers  of  population  gave  Federalist  majorities.  But 
the  great  rural  vote  of  the  State  was  true  to  the  "farmer 
boy."  The  result  of  the  polling  was  43,324  for  Tomp- 
kins and  39,718  for  Van  Rennsselaer.  In  the  Legisla- 
ture the  result  was  mixed.  The  Democrats  carried  the 
Middle,  Southern,  and  Western  districts  by  substantial 
majorities,  and  the  Federalists  only  the  Eastern.  But 


350  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

in  the  Assembly  the  Federalists  won,  securing  a 
majority  of  ten,  because  of  the  election  of  Federalist 
members  by  the  votes  of  Clinton's  friends  in  New  York 
City. 

In  this  campaign  Solomon  Southwick,  with  his 
Albany  Register,  had  been  not  only  outspoken  but  vio- 
lent in  opposition  to  Governor  Tompkins  and  indeed 
to  the  Madison  administration  and  to  the  Democratic 
party  generally.  This  temporarily  deprived  the 
Democrats  of  a  party  organ  at  the  State  capital,  and 
steps  were  taken  to  supply  the  want.  A  company  was 
formed  to  establish  a  new  paper  in  that  city,  to  be 
known  as  the  Albany  Argus,  and  Jesse  Buel,  thitherto 
editor  and  publisher  of  the  Plebeian,  in  Ulster  county, 
became  its  editor.  It  quickly  attained  much  influence, 
and  had  a  notable  record  thereafter  as  an  organ  of 
New  York  Democracy. 

As  if  to  complete  the  discomfiture  of  Clinton,  dur- 
ing the  summer  of  1813  several  changes  were  made  in 
important  offices  in  New  York  City  under  the  Fed- 
eral government,  including  those  of  the  United  States 
Marshal  and  Surveyor  of  the  Port,  for  no  other  reason 
than  that  the  incumbents  were  friends  of  Clinton. 
The  places  were  then  filled  with  supporters  of  Tomp- 
kins. These  changes  were  made  at  the  urging  of 
Ambrose  Spencer,  who  constituted  himself  the  leader 
of  the  anti-Clinton  forces. 

Governor  Tompkins  was  thus  supreme  in  the  Demo- 
cratic party  in  New  York,  and  seemed  fairly  on  the  way 
to  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States,  which  was  the 
goal  he  sought.  Yet  at  this  very  time  there  seemed 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  351 

to  rise  a  serious  obstacle  in  his  path,  in  the  person  of 
a  man  whom  he  himself  had  put  forward — as  he  him- 
self had  been  put  forward  by  DeWitt  Clinton.  This 
was  John  Armstrong,  of  whom  people  began  to  talk 
as  likely  to  be  the  next  President  of  the  United  States, 
a  forecast  which  in  the  light  of  subsequent  events  now 
seems  grotesque. 

Armstrong  was  a  pretentious  weakling.  He  had 
been  a  protege  and  pupil  of  Horatio  Gates  in  the  Revo- 
lution, a  circumstance  in  itself  sufficient  to  damn  him. 
It  was  he  whom  Gates  sent  post-haste  after  Benedict 
Arnold  to  try  to  call  him  back  from  winning  the  battle 
of  Saratoga.  Later  he  had  written  the  wretched  "New- 
burgh  Letters." 

He  wrote  the  "petition"  against  the  Sedition  laws 
which  led  to  the  prosecution  of  Jedediah  Peck. 
He  was  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate,  hostile  to 
Washington,  and  resigned.  He  was  sent  as  Minister 
to  France  and  Commissioner  to  Spain,  and  did  not  dis- 
tinguish himself.  Indeed,  he  was  recalled  from  France 
at  the  request  of  the  French  government.  Then  he 
got  himself  commissioned  a  brigadier-general,  and 
then,  on  almost  the  very  day  when  Tompkins  was 
renominated  for  Governor,  Armstrong,  largely  through 
the  favorable  influence  of  Tompkins  and  Ambrose 
Spencer,  was  appointed  Secretary  of  War.  The  Senate 
hesitated  to  confirm  him  because  of  its  doubt  of  his 
fitness,  but  finally  did  so. 

Tompkins,  strangely  enough,  was  fearful  of  Arm- 
strong's rivalry.  But  long  before  the  next  Presi- 
dential campaign  Armstrong  was  thoroughly  elimi- 


352  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

nated  from  the  list  of  possibilities.  It  is  true  that  he 
did  some  good  work  as  Secretary  of  War.  His  general 
plan  of  campaign  against  Canada  was  not  devoid  of 
merit,  though  it  was  spoiled  by  Dearborn  and  Van 
Rensselaer.  The  best  of  all  his  services  was  his  recog- 
nition of  the  ability  of  Jacob  Brown  and  Winfield 
Scott  and  his  promotion  of  them  to  places  of  usefulness. 
But  on  the  other  hand  he  persisted  in  sticking  to, 
coddling,  and  promoting  the  unspeakable  Wilkinson 
and  assigned  him  to  command  in  New  York.  Inevi- 
tably, the  sequel  was  one  of  the  most  disastrous  scandals 
in  the  whole  war,  which  made  the  military  campaign 
of  1813  the  worst  in  the  history  of  the  United  States 
army.  The  next  year  came  the  comparable  disgrace 
of  the  abandonment  of  Washington  to  a  handful  of 
invaders,  and  that  caused  Armstrong's  disappearance 
from  public  life. 

That  all  through  1813  Tompkins  should  have  been 
haunted  with  the  fear  that  Armstrong  would  outstrip 
him  in  the  Presidential  race  is  a  strange  reflection  upon 
his  political  sagacity  and  his  judgment  of  men.  Yet 
so  strong  was  this  fear  that  he  actually  became 
alienated  from  Ambrose  Spencer  because  of  the  latter's 
intimacy  with  Armstrong,  and  thus  lost  the  support  of 
one  of  the  most  influential  leaders  of  the  State. 

Meanwhile,  DeWitt  Clinton  was  engaged  in  a 
devious  intrigue  for  the  retention  of  the  one  office  that 
was  left  to  him,  the  Mayoralty  of  New  York  City. 
We  have  seen  that  while  in  April,  1813,  the  Demo- 
crats carried  the  State  for  Governor,  the  Federalists 
won  the  Assembly.  That,  under  the  practical  alliance 


ELIPHALET  NOTT 

Eliphalet  Nott,  educator;  born  in  Ashford,  Conn.,  June  25, 
1773;  clergyman;  sent  out  from  New  London  as  missionary 
to  Western  New  York;  pastor  and  teacher  at  Cherry  Valley; 
pastor  of  First  Presbyterian  church  at  Albany,  1798-1804; 
elected  president  of  Union  College,  1804;  died  at  Schenectady, 
N.  Y.,  January  29,  1866. 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  353 

between  him  and  the  Federalists,  should  have  assured 
the  election  of  a  Council  of  Appointment  favorable  to 
Clinton.  But  there  were  no  Federalist  Senators  from 
the  Middle  and  Western  districts  to  appoint  to  the 
Council,  and  that  body  had,  therefore,  to  stand  two 
Federalists  and  two  Democrats,  with  Governor  Tomp- 
kins  casting  the  deciding  vote.  The  Federalists  were 
Elbert  H.  Jones  and  Samuel  Stewart,  and  the  Demo- 
crats were  Morgan  Lewis  and  Henry  A.  Townsend. 
That,  especially  considering  Lewis's  enmity,  seemed  to 
mean  disaster  to  Clinton.  But  Clinton  was  saved,  at 
least  from  being  turned  out  of  the  Mayoralty,  by  the 
support  of  Townsend,  though  in  circumstances  only  a 
little  less  galling  to  him  than  loss  of  the  Mayoralty 
would  have  been. 

The  preceding  Council  of  Appointment  had 
appointed  James  Kent,  then  Chief-Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  to  be  Chancellor  in  place  of  Mr. 
Lansing,  who  had  been  retired  for  age,  and  it  had  pro- 
moted Smith  Thompson  from  an  Associate-Justiceship 
to  be  Chief-Justice  in  Kent's  place.  It  appointed 
nobody,  however,  to  succeed  Thompson  on  the  bench, 
and  that  vacancy  was  therefore  to  be  filled  by  the  new 
Council  in  1814.  It  was  the  desire  of  the  Federalists 
to  appoint  Jonas  Platt,  an  eminently  fitting  choice,  but 
of  course  there  was  little  chance  of  their  doing  so  unless 
through  some  bargain  which  would  secure  them  the 
vote  of  Senator  Townsend.  This  was  effected  through 
Clinton's  desire  to  retain  the  Mayoralty  of  New  York. 
It  was  made  clear — indeed,  it  was  already  obvious — to 
him  that  Morgan  Lewis  would  vote  for  his  removal, 


354  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1813 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

and  that  Lewis's  vote  added  to  the  votes  of  the  two  Fed- 
eralists would  effect  that  end.  Whether  the  sugges- 
tion came  from  Clinton  or  from  the  Federalists  is  not 
certain,  though  Clinton  was  generally  regarded  as  the 
author  of  it;  but  it  was  to  this  effect,  that  the  Fed- 
eralists should  vote  with  Townsend  for  the  retention 
of  Clinton  in  office,  and  that  Townsend  should  vote 
with  the  Federalists  for  the  appointment  of  Platt. 
This  "deal"  was  quite  practicable,  since  Townsend, 
although  elected  in  1810  as  a  Democrat  and  still 
nominally  a  member  of  that  party,  had  stood  with 
Clinton  in  the  party  rights,  had  voted  for  the  Bank  of 
America,  and  had  openly  quarreled  with  Governor 
Tompkins,  Ambrose  Spencer,  and  other  party  leaders. 
The  bargain  was  agreed  upon  and  would  have  been 
carried  through  without  any  scandal  or  more  than  pass- 
ing notice,  had  it  not  been  for  a  counter-manoeuver  by 
Clinton's  implacable  foe,  Morgan  Lewis.  In  some  way 
he  learned  in  advance  of  the  bargain  between  Clinton 
and  the  Federalists,  and  reported  it  to  Tompkins.  It 
was  recognized  by  them  both  that  it  would  probably 
be  impossible  to  prevent  its  consummation,  but  they 
agreed  that  it  should  be  made  as  costly  as  possible  to 
Clinton.  Accordingly,  when  the  Council  met  for  the 
appointment  of  a  Justice,  Lewis  promptly  placed  in 
nomination  the  name  of  Richard  Riker.  Now,  Riker 
was  Clinton's  "own  familiar  friend."  He  had  been 
his  second  in  his  duel  with  Swartwout.  He  had  been 
the  head  of  the  committee  which  promoted  Clinton's 
campaign  for  the  Presidency.  He  had  for  years  been 
Clinton's  most  loyal  and  most  efficient  lieutenant. 


1813]  PARTISANSHIP  IN  WAR  TIME  355 

This,  then,  was  the  dilemma:  If  Townsend  voted 
for  Platt,  Clinton  would  retain  the  Mayoralty,  but 
Clinton's  friend  Riker  would  be  defeated.  If  Town- 
send  voted  for  Riker,  Clinton's  friend  would  win  the 
Judgeship,  but  Clinton  himself  would  lose  the  Mayor- 
alty. And  Townsend  looked  to  Clinton  for  directions 
what  to  do.  Clinton  was  thus  compelled  to  choos 
between  himself  and  his  friend.  To  his  credit — or 
perhaps  to  his  discredit — he  hesitated  for  some  time. 
At  last  he  decided,  in  favor  of  himself  against  his 
friend.  He  kept  the  Mayoralty,  but  he  lost  the  most 
loyal  friend  he  had  in  the  world  and  gained  another 
implacable  enemy. 

The  only  other  appointment  of  consequence  by  this 
Council  was  that  of  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer  to  be 
Secretary  of  State,  in  place  of  Elisha  Jenkins.  Prac- 
tically all  of  the  other  offices  in  the  State  were  left 
undisturbed. 


GOVERNOR  TOMPKINS  entered  upon  his 
third  term  as  a  great  national  figure.  His 
reelection  was  regarded  as  a  great  triumph  for  a 
national  administration  which  was  sorely  in  need  of  all 
the  aid  it  could  get.  Federalism,  rejuvenated  in 
opposition  to  the  war,  was  rampant  throughout  the 
country.  New  England  was  wholly  under  its  sway, 
in  the  extremest  form;  literally  raging  against  the 
Washington  government,  and  going  so  far  as  to  talk 
of  secession.  New  Jersey  was  strongly  inclined  in  the 
same  direction,  but  waited  to  see  what  New  York  would 
do.  Had  New  York  repudiated  the  administration, 
every  State  east  of  the  Delaware  River  would  have 
been  arrayed  against  it  and  against  the  further  prosecu- 
tion of  the  war,  and  the  price  of  retaining  them  in  the 
Union  might  have  been  the  complete  discrediting  of 
the  administration  and  the  summary  ending  of  the  war 
in  a  humiliating  compromise. 

But  Tompkins  won  the  New  York  election,  and  he 
was  the  staunch  supporter  of  Madison's  administration, 
not  alone  against  the  Federalists  but  equally  against  the 
anti-administration  faction  of  the  Democratic  party. 
His  reelection  was  not  only  hailed  with  raptures  of 
delight  at  Washington,  but  also  it  had  a  profound  and 
decisive  effect  in  other  States.  It  caused  New  Eng- 
land to  act  with  more  moderation,  and  New  Jersey 

356 


1814]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  357 

to  withhold  her  adherence  to  extreme  Federalism. 
Beyond  doubt  it  saved  the  administration  and  the 
country  from  a  serious  political  crisis. 

The  new  Legislature,  the  Thirty-seventh,  met  at 
Albany  on  January  25,  1814,  and  the  Federalists,  hav- 
ing a  majority  of  ten  in  the  Assembly,  elected  James 
Emott,  of  Dutchess  county,  Speaker.  The  Governor's 
address  was  devoted  chiefly  to  the  war  and  to  the  direct 
tax  which  Congress  had  levied  upon  the  States.  One 
of  the  earliest  acts  of  the  Legislature  was  to  pass,  after 
an  unseemly  controversy,  an  appropriation  measure  for 
the  relief  of  sufferers  from  the  ravages  of  the  war  on 
the  frontier.  This  was  proposed  by  the  Federalists  in 
the  Assembly,  and  was  passed  by  a  strict  party  vote, 
all  Democrats  voting  against  it.  It  is  to  be  assumed 
that  the  Democrats  voted  against  it  for  the  reason  that 
the  Commissioners  who  were  to  administer  the  relief, 
and  who  were  named  in  the  bill,  were  all  Federalists. 
The  Senate,  having  a  Democratic  majority,  passed  the 
bill  after  amending  it  by  substituting  the  names  of 
Democrats  as  Commissioners.  In  this  amendment  the 
Assembly  refused  to  concur,  and  for  some  time  there 
was  danger  that  the  bill  would  fail  altogether  for  tha^ 
purely  partisan  reason.  It  was  not  until  February  18 
that  it  was  finally  enacted. 

In  other  directions  partisan  and  factional  passions 
were  manifested,  sometimes  to  an  indecorous  degree. 
The  Senate's  reply  to  the  Governor's  address  was  writ- 
ten by  Martin  Van  Buren,  -and  exhibited  all  his 
adroitness  of  speech.  It  was  of  course  entirely  sympa- 
thetic with  the  Governor's  view,  and  contained  a  deft 


358  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 


and  subtle  reproach  upon  all  who  ventured  to  oppose 
or  to  criticise  the  war.  The  reply  of  the  Assembly  was 
almost  bitter  in  its  hostility  to  the  war  and  to  the  Gov- 
ernor. The  Senate  promptly  passed  a  bill,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Governor's  recommendation,  for  the 
assumption  by  the  State  of  its  proportion  of  the  direct 
tax  levied  by  Congress,  but  the  Assembly  rejected  it 
by  a  strict  party  vote — the  Assembly  committee  which 
reported  on  it  declaring  that  instead  of  wasting  its 
resources  by  making  further  grants  to  the  national  gov- 
ernment, the  State  should  demand  to  be  reimbursed 
for  the  expenses  which  it  had  already  incurred  on 
account  of  the  war. 

The  Assembly  adopted,  on  motion  of  a  Federalist 
member,  a  set  of  resolutions  expressing  admiration  of 
the  achievement  of  Commodore  Perry  and  his  com- 
rades in  the  battle  of  Lake  Erie,  but  expressing  dis- 
approval of  the  "disastrous,  destructive,  and  ruinous 
war,"  and  insisting  that  our  commercial  rights  should 
have  been  defended  by  a  competent  navy  and  not  by 
an  embargo.  The  Democrats  strove  in  vain  to  secure 
the  elimination  of  the  hostile  reflections  upon  the  war 
and  upon  the  policy  of  the  national  administration. 
Numerous  other  partisan  controversies  arose  during  the 
session,  within  each  house  and  between  the  two  houses, 
the  chief  Democratic  protagonists  in  the  Senate  being 
Erastus  Root  and  Martin  Van  Buren,  the  latter  of 
whom  swiftly  rose  to  State  leadership  in  the  party, 
while  the  Federalists  of  the  Assembly  were  represented 
by  David  B.  Ogden,  Samuel  Jones,  Jr.,  Charles  Bing, 
and  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer. 


1814]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  359 

In  other  respects  it  was  an  active  session.  The  Rev. 
Dr.  Eliphalet  Nott  secured  from  the  Legislature,  for 
Union  College,  by  virtue  of  some  singularly  adroit 
"log-rolling,"  a  grant  of  $200,000,  to  be  raised  by  a 
lottery.  Support  for  this  extraordinary  measure  was 
secured  by  the  expedient  of  coupling  with  it  other  but 
smaller  grants  to  a  number  of  institutions  in  various 
parts  of  the  State — among  them  Columbia  and  Hamil- 
ton colleges,  the  Historical  Society  of  New  York,  and 
the  African  church.  The  School  law  was  radically 
revised  according  to  a  draft  prepared  by  Mr.  Hawley, 
the  very  competent  Superintendent  of  Education.  No 
fewer  than  sixteen  applications  for  bank  charters  were 
received,  chiefly,  if  not  all,  of  the  "wild  cat"  variety, 
and  all  were  rejected.  The  Legislature  adjourned 
without  day  on  April  IS. 

In  that  month  the  annual  election  for  a  new  Legisla- 
ture was  held,  in  circumstances  of  despondency  for  the 
Governor  and  his  party.  Despite  the  splendid  achieve- 
ments of  Jacob  Brown  and  Winfield  Scott,  the  war  had 
not  been  going  well  for  the  American  arms,  and  there 
was  a  general  feeling  that  the  Federalists  would  win  at 
the  polls.  But  to  the  astonishment  of  both  parties  and 
to  the  delight  of  the  Governor  and  of  the  administra- 
tion at  Washington,  the  Democrats  swept  the  State. 
They  elected  every  Senator  save  one,  an  overwhelm- 
ing majority  of  the  Assembly,  and  two-thirds  of  the 
Representatives  in  Congress.  They  would  have  elected 
all  the  Senators  had  not  Solomon  Southwick  most 
injudiciously  been  put  forward  as  one  of  their  candi- 
dates in  the  Eastern  district.  That  once  phenomenally 


360  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

popular  and  prosperous  editor,  printer,  and  politician, 
State  Printer  and  agent  for  the  Bank  of  America,  had 
become  practically  bankrupt  both  pecuniarily  and 
politically,  and  he  was  put  forward  by  his  friends  in  a 
vain  hope  of  securing  his  rehabilitation.  He  was  badly 
defeated  by  George  Tibbits,  a  Federalist. 

It  seems  not  improbable  that  the  victory  in  New 
York  for  the  Democratic  party  and  thus  for  the  Madi- 
son administration  was  largely  because  of  and  not 
merely  in  spite  of  the  reverses  which  the  American 
arms  had  suffered  in  the  war.  For  there  soon  followed 
what  was  in  some  respects  the  most  humiliating  reverse 
of  all,  namely,  the  disgraceful  abandonment  of  Wash- 
ington to  a  handful  of  British  invaders,  and  in  conse- 
quence a  still  further  rallying  of  the  people  of  New 
York  to  the  support  of  the  government.  Even  the 
most  extreme  Federalists,  who  a  few  months  before 
had  been  adopting  resolutions  against  the  prosecution 
of  the  war,  were  now  at  least  silent,  while  the  masses 
of  that  party  did  not  hesitate  to  join  with  Democrats 
in  public  meetings  throughout  the  State,  declaring  that 
the  government  must  be  supported  to  the  fullest  pos- 
sible extent,  and  that  there  must  be  no  more  partisan 
bickerings  over  the  rights  or  wrongs  of  the  war  until 
foreign  invaders  were  driven  from  the  soil  of  the 
United  States.  At  heart  the  Federalists  were  of 
course  entirely  militant  for  their  country. 

In  New  York  City  there  was  some  fear  that  that 
place  would  suffer  the  fate  of  Washington,  or  at  least 
that  of  Baltimore,  and  impromptu  military  organiza- 


1814]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  361 

tions  were  formed,  with  daily  drilling,  in  preparation 
to  repel  an  attack.  DeWitt  Clinton,  as  Mayor,  took 
the  lead  in  these  operations,  and  thus  regained  much 
of  the  popularity  and  prestige  which  he  had  lost, 
though  of  course  that  was  not  his  purpose  in  his 
patriotic  endeavors. 

But  the  supreme  leader  in  patriotic  devotion  was 
Governor  Tompkins,  and  at  this  crisis  he  rose  magnifi- 
cently to  the  needs  of  the  occasion.  There  was  press- 
ing need  for  money,  to  the  amount  of  at  least  half  a 
million  dollars,  for  the  fortification  and  defense  of  New 
York  and  other  equally  urgent  purposes.  The  banks 
were  asked  to  loan  it,  on  the  security  of  the  treasury 
notes  of  the  United  States  government;  but  they 
refused.  That  was  not  so  much  a  reflection  upon  the 
patriotism  of  the  banks  as  upon  the  solvency  of  the 
national  government.  The  banks  could  not  properly 
risk  the  money  which  they  held  in  trust  for  their 
depositors  on  a  security  which  they  deemed  inadequate, 
and  thus  they  regarded,  at  that  unhappy  time,  the  notes 
of  the  United  States  treasury! 

They  would,  however,  advance  the  money  upon  the 
security  of  such  notes,  if  Governor  Tompkins  would 
endorse  the  notes!  Now,  Tompkins  was  not  a  rich 
man,  and  would  not  be  able  to  make  good  out  of  his 
own  means  any  such  sum  as  half  a  million  dollars. 
Moreover,  he  had  no  authority  to  endorse  the  notes  in 
the  name  of  the  State,  but  would  do  so  entirely  on  his 
own  personal  responsibility.  It  was  not  his  fortune, 
it  was  not  his  official  position,  for  which  the  banks  had 


362  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

regard,  but  simply  for  his  personal  character.  It 
would  have  been  impossible  to  pay  him  a  higher  trib- 
ute than  that  which  was  thus  implied. 

It  is  interesting  to  recall  that  this  proposition  was 
made  to  the  Governor  by  Rufus  King,  the  leader  of 
the  Federalists  and  the  implacable  opponent  of  the 
Madison  administration.  But  King  placed  patriotism 
above  party  or  personality.  He  went  straight  to  the 
Governor  and  told  him  what  the  banks  wanted;  add- 
ing that  it  was  a  time  when  it  was  every  man's  duty  to 
place  himself  and  all  that  he  had  at  the  service  of  the 
government,  which  he  was  willing  to  do. 

"If  I  do  this,"  observed  Tompkins,  "it  will  be  on  my 
own  responsibility,  and  if  the  government  defaulted 
or  the  State  did  not  back  me  up,  I  should  be  ruined." 

"Quite  true,"  replied  King,  "and  it  is  better  for  a 
man  to  be  ruined  than  for  the  country  to  be  lost.  But 
I  pledge  you  my  honor  that  if  you  will  do  this  thing 
I  will  support  you  to  the  full  extent  of  my  resources." 

Without  hesitation  Tompkins  endorsed  the  notes, 
and  the  money  was  provided  by  the  banks.  It  should 
be  added  that  at  various  other  times  during  the  war 
Governor  Tompkins  borrowed  money  for  the  govern- 
ment without  authority  and  on  his  personal  credit,  and 
on  some  occasions  failed  to  secure  proper  vouchers. 
The  result  was  that  the  military  accounts  of  the  State 
became  badly  mixed,  and  the  Comptroller  reported  that 
there  was  a  deficit  of  $120,000  to  be  charged  against 
the  Governor.  Tompkins  replied  that  on  the  contrary 
the  State  was  owing  him  a  large  sum.  An  official 


1SUJ  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  363 

investigation  was  ordered,  and  it  was  found  that  the 
State  was  indeed  indebted  to  him  in  the  sum  of 
$90,000. 

The  British  capture  of  Washington  had  the  effect  of 
finally  eliminating  John  Armstrong  from  public  life. 
Immediately  upon  that  disaster  he  resigned  his  place 
as  Secretary  of  War,  and  retired  to  his  home  at  Red 
Hook,  to  spend  the  remainder  of  his  life  as  a  recluse. 
Dr.  Hammond  in  his  History  of  New  York  strongly 
intimates  that  Armstrong  was  unjustly  sacrificed,  first 
by  President  Madison,  who  wanted  to  make  him  the 
scapegoat  of  the  administration,  and  second  and  third 
by  Monroe,  who  was  Secretary  of  State,  and  by  Gov- 
ernor Tompkins,  both  of  whom  had  Presidential  aspira- 
tions and  regarded  Armstrong  as  a  formidable  rival 
whom  they  wished  to  get  rid  of.  It  scarcely  seems 
credible  that  this  was  true,  at  least  so  far  as  Madison 
and  Tompkins  were  concerned;  nor  has  maturer  judg- 
ment confirmed  Dr.  Hammond's  high  estimate  of 
Armstrong's  "mighty  intellect." 

Governor  Tompkins  very  judiciously  called  the 
Thirty-eighth  Legislature  together  in  special  session 
on  September  26,  1814,  when  Samuel  Young  was 
chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  The  Governor  in  his 
address  dwelt  chiefly  upon  the  war  and  its  exigencies, 
and  the  special  perils  and  duties  of  New  York.  He 
urged  the  desirability  of  relieving  the  poorer  classes 
of  the  population  from  bearing  the  unreasonable  pro- 
portion of  the  burden  of  militia  duty  to  which  they 
were  subjected  by  the  existing  laws,  and  the  necessity 
of  making  property  the  criterion  of  contribution  to  the 


364  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

public  defense.  Upon  this  recommendation  the  Leg- 
islature acted  favorably  and  promptly,  with  a  law 
authorizing  the  raising  of  troops  for  the  defense  of  the 
State  on  a  classified  system.  Twelve  thousand  men 
were  to  be  enlisted,  practically  by  conscription.  Nomi- 
nally they  were  to  be  volunteers;  but  if  each  class  did 
not  provide  its  quota  of  men,  assessments  were  to  be 
made  upon  all  the  members  of  the  defaulting  class 
in  proportion  to  their  property  holdings.  It  was  a 
drastic  measure,  but  it  was  approved  by  public  senti- 
ment. Another  law  provided  for  the  enlistment  of 
two  thousand  negro  slaves  for  three  years.  Such 
enlistments  were  to  be  with  the  consent  of  the  masters 
of  the  slaves,  and  the  negroes  were  to  be  emancipated 
from  slavery  on  being  honorably,  discharged  at  the  end 
of  their  term  of  service. 

Another  law  increased  the  pay  of  the  militia,  while  in 
the  national  service,  above  the  compensation  granted  by 
the  national  government,  and  another  provided  for  the 
enlistment  of.  a  corps  of  "sea  fencibles,"  consisting  of 
twenty  companies,  for  the  special  defense  of  the  port 
of  New  York.  These  "sea  fencibles"  were  to  be 
enlisted  for  three  years,  and  were  to  be  constantly 
ready  at  instant  call  for  service.  It  was  intended  that 
they  should  take  the  place  of  the  militia  for  port 
defense,  leaving  the  latter  free  for  inland  service.  Gov- 
ernor Tompkins  was  reimbursed  for  personal  expendi- 
tures which  he  had  made  in  emergencies  without 
authorization;  provision  was  made  for  fuller  fortifica- 
tion of  Staten  Island;  men  actually  engaged  in  the 


1814]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  365 

public  military  service  were  exempted  from  arrest  on 
civil  process;  and  traffic  and  intercourse  with  the  enemy 
were  prohibited. 

Still  another  law  was  enacted,  of  dubious  virtue  even 
at  that  time.  It  was  intended  to  promote  privateering 
against  the  enemy's  commerce,  by  authorizing  the 
organization  of  associations  for  that  purpose.  This 
alone  of  all  these  war  measures  met  with  serious 
opposition  in  the  Legislature,  the  Federalist  members 
voting  solidly  against  it.  More  significant  still,  the 
Federalist  members  of  the  Council  of  Revision,  under 
the  lead  of  Chancellor  Kent,  opposed  it  and  sought  to 
veto  it.  The  Chancellor  argued  against  it  with  impres- 
sive force,  as  a  measure  contrary  to  the  genius  of  the 
American  Constitution  and  repugnant  to  the  civilized 
and  enlightened  spirit  of  the  age.  Reply  was  made 
to  the  Chancellor  in  the  public  press  by  Martin  Van 
Buren,  who  had  become  the  chief  spokesman  of  the 
national  administration  in  New  York  and  therefore 
the  champion  of  all  State  measures  intended  for  its 
aid  and  comfort,  and  the  law  was  approved  by  the 
Democratic  majority  of  the  Council  of  Revision, 
though  the  moral  honors  of  the  discussion  undoubtedly 
rested  with  Kent. 

During  this  session  of  the  New  York  Legislature  the 
scheme  of  the  famous  Hartford  Convention  was 
broached  by  Harrison  Gray  Otis  and  other  Massa- 
chusetts Federalists,  and  was  of  course  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  leaders  of  that  party  in  New  York.  It 
was  variously  regarded  by  them.  Some  of  the  fore- 
most, such  as  Daniel  Cady  and  Abraham  Van  Vechten, 


366  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it,  but  opposed  it  in 
the  strongest  manner  as  unpatriotic  if  not  actually 
treasonable;  and  their  influence  was  so  commanding 
that  the  party  as  a  whole  never  committed  itself  to  the 
scheme  or  gave  it  any  encouragement.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  were  some  who  did  favor  it,  and  a  consider- 
able number  were  inclined  to  give  it  serious  considera- 
tion. Among  these  were  many  of  the  Federalist  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature,  a  dozen  of  whom  went  so  far 
as  to  issue  a  call  for  a  New  York  State  convention, 
the  purpose  of  which  was  ostensibly  to  consider  the 
course  which  should  be  pursued  in  matters  of  State 
legislation,  but  which  must  almost  certainly  have  had 
in  contemplation  cooperation  with  the  extremists  of 
New  England.  Abraham  Van  Vechten  was,  strangely 
enough,  among  those  who  issued  the  call.  His  motive 
was,  however,  to  assure  himself  a  place  in  the  Conven- 
tion if  it  should  be  held,  in  which  he  could  oppose, 
with  all  his  unsurpassed  dialectic  skill,  any  extreme 
action. 

The  call  for  this  Convention  was  published  in  the 
New  York  Evening  Post,  one  of  the  foremost  Fed- 
eralist papers,  at  the  end  of  September,  1814,  and  on 
October  5  the  Convention  was  held.  It  was  not  a  public 
gathering,  however,  and  reports  of  its  proceedings  were 
not  printed.  Happily,  it  was  attended  by  Abraham 
Van  Vechten,  Daniel  Cady,  Gouverneur  Morris,  and 
other  men  of  influence  and  ability  who,  whatever  their 
political  sentiments,  were  not  disposed  to  play  at  sedi- 
tion. They  served  as  a  most  effective  check  upon  the 
more  radical  spirits,  to  so  good  effect  that  no  action 


1814]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  367 

concerning  the  Hartford  Convention  was  taken,  and 
indeed  no  mention  of  that  ill-starred  body  was  made. 
Instead,  the  New  York  gathering  contented  itself  with 
discussing  the  attitude  which  ought  to  be  assumed 
toward  the  proposed  Conscription  act,  already  men- 
tioned, which  Van  Buren  had  caused  to  be  prepared 
at  Albany  for  adoption  by  the  Legislature;  and  which 
was  then  pending.  The  volunteer  system  in  the  army 
had  proved  a  disgraceful  failure,  and  in  sheer  despera- 
tion the  State  and  Federal  governments  looked  to  a 
draft  as  necessary  to  save  the  country  from  British 
conquest.  The  New  York  State  act  was  passed,  and 
there  is  little  doubt  that  still  more  drastic  conscription 
would  have  been  resorted  to  by  the  Federal  govern- 
ment itself  had  not  the  news  of  the  peace-making  at 
Ghent  come  with  unexpected  suddenness.  But  in 
October  there  was  no  expectation  of  peace,  and  there 
was  expectation  of  a  draft,  and  to  that  subject  the  New 
York  Convention  addressed  itself. 

That  Governor  Tompkins  intervened  in  or  attempted 
in  any  way  to  influence  this  Federalist  gathering  is  not 
to  be  supposed.  Yet  there  is  no  doubt  that  his  pres- 
ence in  the  State  and  his  general  influence  in  behalf 
of  the  national  administration  were  of  immense  service 
at  this  critical  time.  In  fact,  it  may  be  doubted  if  any 
other  one  man  in  the  nation  was  so  great  a  power  for 
good.  Upon  the  retirement  of  Armstrong  from  the 
War  office  the  duties  of  that  department  were  tem- 
porarily assumed  by  James  Monroe,  the  Secretary  of 
State.  President  Madison  thereupon  invited  and  even 
urged  Tompkins  to  enter  his  cabinet  as  Secretary  of 


368  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1814 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

State,  the  plan  being  for  Monroe  to  resign  that  office 
in  favor  of  that  of  Secretary  of  War.  Madison  earn- 
estly desired  this,  and  Monroe  was  understood  to  be 
quite  willing.  At  this  time,  too,  the  State  department 
was  regarded  as  the  pretty  sure  stepping-stone  to  the 
Presidency,  and  it  was  intimated  to  Tompkins  that  he 
could  count  upon  the  influence  of  the  administration  to 
make  him  Madison's  successor  in  the  White  House. 
The  temptation  was  strong,  and  it  was  directly  in  line 
with  Tompkins's  own  ambition.  But  patriotism  was 
superior  to  personal  preferment,  and  the  Governor's 
vision  was  keener  and  his  judgment  was  sounder  than 
the  President's.  Tompkins  declined  the  flattering 
invitation,  on  the  ground  that  he  could  serve  the 
nation  and  incidentally  the  administration  more  effi- 
ciently as  Governor  of  New  York  than  as  Secretary 
of  State.  In  that  he  was  quite  right.  The  crisis  of 
the  war  was  at  hand,  and  New  York  held  the  key  to  the 
national  position.  If  it  stood  firm  in  support  of  the 
government,  New  England  disaffection  would  be 
restrained  by  an  impassable  barrier.  If  New  York 
joined  the  Hartford  extremists  against  prosecution  of 
the  war,  chaos  yawned  in  the  foreground  of  the  scene. 
So  Tompkins  remained  at  Albany,  and  New  York 
remained  true  to  the  Union;  and  a  little  later  came 
news  of  the  treaty  of  Ghent. 

There  were  in  our  second  war  with  Great  Britain 
many  heroes  in  the  American  navy.  There  were  a  few 
heroes  in  the  American  army.  The  one  resplendent 
hero  of  our  civil  life  was  the  Governor  of  New  York, 
Daniel  D.  Tompkins. 


AMBROSE  SPENCER 

Ambrose  Spencer,  jurist;  born  in  Salisbury,  Conn.,  Decem- 
ber 13,  1765;  city  clerk  of  Hudson,  N.  V.,  1786-93;  member  of 
assembly,  1794;  state  senate,  1796-1802;  assistant  state  at- 
torney general,  1796;  attorney  general,  1802-4;  justice  supreme 
court,  1804-19;  regent,  1805;  chief  justice,  1819-23;  member 
of  congress,  1829-31;  mayor  of  Albany,  1824-26;  died  in  Lyons, 
N.  Y.,  March  13,  1848.  " 


1815]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  369 

The  special  session  of  the  Thirty-eighth  Legislature 
adjourned  on  October  24,  1814,  and  the  regular  session 
began  on  January  31,  1815.  The  Assembly  being 
strongly  Democratic,  a  new  Council  of  Appointment 
was  promptly  elected,  of  that  political  faith,  its  mem- 
bers being  Jonathan  Dayton  of  the  Southern,  Lucas 
Elmendorff  of  the  Middle,  Ruggles  Hubbard  of  the 
Eastern,  and  Farrand  Stranahan  of  the  Western  dis- 
trict. They  were  all  Democrats,  and  the  party  behind 
them  was,  as  was  years  afterward  remarked  of  another 
organization,  "very  hungry  and  very  thirsty,"  since  for 
three  years  appointments  had  been  chiefly  under  Fed- 
eralist control.  A  "clean  sweep"  of  the  offices  was 
expected  and  was  intended.  Indeed,  it  was  effected, 
but  not  with  the  expedition  which  was  anticipated. 

For  there  at  once  arose  sharp  rivalries  within  the 
party,  with  Martin  Van  Buren,  Ambrose  Spencer,  and 
DeWitt  Clinton  as  the  storm-centers.  Van  Buren  was 
a  State  Senator  and  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the 
party  in  the  Legislature,  and  he  wanted  to  be  Attorney- 
General.  But  in  this  ambition  he  was  opposed  by 
Spencer,  who  was  jealous  of  the  younger  man's  rapidly 
increasing  popularity  and  influence,  which  were  sur- 
passing his  own,  and  who  accordingly  put  forward 
John  Woodworth  as  a  candidate  for  the  place.  It  will 
be  remembered  that  Woodworth  had  formerly  been 
Attorney-General,  and  had  been  displaced  by  the  Fed- 
eralists in  favor  of  Van  Vechten,  and  that  fact  was  of 
course  a  strong  argument  for  his  reappointment. 
Between  the  two  the  Council  of  Appointment 
was  evenly  divided.  Ruggles  supported  Woodworth 


370  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1815 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

because  he  was  his  neighbor  and  friend,  and  Stranahan 
did  so  because  he  was  entirely  subject  to  Spencer's 
influence.  Dayton  and  Elmendorff  were  subject  to  the 
will  of  the  party  "machine,"  and  accordingly  voted  for 
Van  Buren.  That  compelled  the  Governor  to  cast  the 
deciding  vote.  He  was  reluctant  to  do  it,  yet  he  did 
not  hesitate  to  vote  for  Van  Buren.  His  reasons  for 
the  choice  were  doubtless  several  in  number.  In  point 
of  legal  ability  and  fitness  for  the  place,  Van  Buren 
was  certainly  the  peer  if  not  the  superior  of  Wood- 
worth.  But  apart  from  that,  it  was  no  secret  that  Gov- 
ernor Tompkins  strongly  disapproved  of  Spencer's 
activities,  rightly  holding  that  a  Judge  should  keep 
aloof  from  partisanship.  Being  a  candidate  for  the 
Presidency,  moreover,  it  was  only  human  nature  that 
Tompkins  should  incline — other  things  being  equal- 
to  that  side  which  promised  him  the  greatest  political 
advantage,  and  there  was  no  doubt  that  that  was  Van 
Buren's  side. 

This  was  the  beginning  of  a  complete  rupture 
between  Tompkins  and  Judge  Spencer.  When  the 
office  of  Secretary  of  State  was  to  be  filled  there  was 
a  similar  division  in  the  Council.  Spencer  asked  for 
the  appointment  of  his  friend  Elisha  Jenkins,  who  had 
formerly  filled  the  place.  Another  candidate  for  it 
was  Samuel  Young,  the  Speaker  of  the  Assembly.  But 
the  Governor,  having  the  deciding  vote,  refused  to 
accept  either,  and  practically  compelled  the  Council  to 
elect  Peter  B.  Porter.  The  latter  had  been  a  promi- 
nent Representative  in  Congress  and  as  such  had  drafted 
and  reported  the  resolutions  calling  for  the  War  of 


1815]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  371 

1812;  he  had  declined  appointment  as  commanding 
general  of  the  army;  but  he  had  brilliantly  distin- 
guished himself  at  Chippewa  and  at  Lundy's  Lane, 
receiving  therefor  a  gold  medal  from  Congress;  and 
he  was  afterward  Secretary  of  War  in  John  Quincy 
Adams's  cabinet.  One  of  the  most  universally  respected 
men  in  America,  his  appointment  as  Secretary  of  State 
of  New  York  was  an  honor  and  an  adornment  to  that 
commonwealth.  But  it  offended  Spencer.  Inciden- 
tally, no  doubt,  it  greatly  strengthened  Tompkins's  poli- 
tical position,  though  it  would  be  ungracious  to  sug- 
gest that  that  was  the  reason  for  the  Governor's 
insistence  upon  it. 

A  third  blow  to  Spencer  was  given  in  the  election 
of  a  United  States  Senator  to  succeed  Mr.  German. 
Long  in  advance  of  the  actual  election  Judge  Spencer 
proposed  John  Armstrong  as  a  candidate,  partly  on  the 
same  ground  as  that  of  Woodworth  and  Jenkins,  that 
he  had  formerly  filled  the  office;  but  also,  no  doubt, 
to  provide  a  place  for  him  and  to  "vindicate"  him 
after  his  retirement  in  disgrace  from  the  Secretaryship 
of  War.  Against  this  Governor  Tompkins  openly  pro- 
tested, and  in  his  opposition  to  Armstrong  he  was 
strongly  seconded  by  Van  Buren.  Finding  that  Arm- 
strong's election  was  impossible,  Judge  Spencer  had 
himself  proposed  as  a  candidate,  by  some  of  his  friends, 
while  the  Governor  and  Van  Buren  advocated  the  elec- 
tion of  Nathan  Sanford.  When  the  legislative  caucus 
assembled  to  choose  the  party  candidate  an  informal 
canvass  showed  that  a  majority  favored  Sanford.  At 
that  Van  Buren,  seeking  party  harmony  and  wishing 


372  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1815 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

to  give  an  opportunity  for  Spencer's  graceful  with- 
drawal, declared  that  he  had  reason  to  believe  that 
Judge  Spencer  did  not  wish  to  be  considered  a  candi- 
date, and  indeed  would  not  accept  election.  There- 
upon a  committee  was  appointed,  at  the  demand  of 
Spencer's  friends,  to  wait  upon  him  and  ascertain  his 
wishes  in  the  matter.  The  committee  confidentially 
told  Spencer  that  the  majority  of  the  caucus  was  against 
him;  and  in  consequence  it  brought  back  from  him 
the  reply  that  the  Judge  was  unwilling  to  be  regarded 
as  a  candidate  because  he  "would  not  put  himself  in 
competition  with  so  young  a  man  as  Mr.  Sanford"! 
In  fact,  Sanford  was  fourteen  years  the  younger,  being 
thirty-six  while  Spencer  was  fifty.  Sanford  was  of 
course  elected. 

These  operations  naturally  cemented  a  close  political 
friendship  between  Governor  Tompkins  and  Mr.  Van 
Buren.  They  also  inclined  Judge  Spencer  to  ally  him- 
self with  anyone  who  was  opposed  to  or  was  opposed 
by  those  gentlemen ;  and  thus  he  was  led  to  span  a 
breach  of  years  and  to  renew  his  old-time  friendship 
with  DeWitt  Clinton.  At  first,  it  is  true,  the  antago- 
nism between  Spencer  and  Clinton  was  intensified,  the 
former  urging  that  the  Council  of  Appointment  should 
remove  Clinton  from  the  Mayoralty  of  New  York 
which  he  still  held  and  which  was  the  most  lucrative 
and  almost  the  most  powerful  office  in  the  State.  Tam- 
many Hall  was  insistent  upon  Clinton's  deposition  and 
instructed  Dayton,  a  Tammany  man,  to  vote  for  it,  and 
Spencer  directed  Stranahan  to  do  the  same  But  Hub- 


1815]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM 

bard  and  Elmendorff  refused,  making  a  deadlock  in 
the  Council,  which  the  Governor  hesitated  to  break 
with  his  vote. 

This  hesitancy  may  have  arisen  in  part  from  politi- 
cal considerations.  Had  he  voted  one  way,  the  Gov- 
ernor would  have  incurred  the  hostility  of  the  Clinton- 
ians,  who  were  a  powerful  faction.  Had  he  voted  the 
other  way,  he  would  have  incurred  the  enmity  of  Tam- 
many Hall,  or  Martling's  Men,  as  that  organization  was 
still  often  called.  In  either  case  his  campaign  for  the 
Presidency  might  have  been  unfavorably  affected. 
There  is,  however,  no  doubt  that  he  was  reluctant  on 
the  merits  of  the  case  to  see  Clinton  removed.  That 
formidable  man,  having  passed  through  the  furor 
politicus  of  his  earlier  years,  had  ripened  into  scholar- 
ship and  statesmanship  comparable  with  the  best  in 
America.  He  had  been  efficiently  loyal  in  the  war, 
and  heroic  in  the  yellow  fever  epidemic  which  had 
scourged  the  city,  and  there  was  no  serious  fault  of 
any  kind  to  be  alleged  against  his  administration,  which 
had  lasted  longer  than  that  of  any  other  Mayor  of  that 
city  since  Peter  Stuyvesant,  with  the  sole  exception  of 
Richard  Varick. 

He  was,  however,  marked  for  slaughter.  Tammany 
Hall  insisted  upon  it,  and  Tammany  was  then  rbe 
dominant  and  representative  faction  of  the  party  in 
New  York  City.  The  deed  was  finally  effected  through 
one  of  the  strangest  political  combinations  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  State.  Gulian  C.  Verplanck,  who  after- 
ward was  for  many  years  one  of  the  foremost  jurists, 
theologians,  scholars,  and  men  of  letters  in  New  York, 


374  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1815 


was  at  this  time  actively  interested  in  politics  as  the 
leader  of  a  small  but  highly  intellectual  faction  of 
independents  such  as  three-quarters  of  a  century  later 
would  have  been  known  as  mugwumps.  Conceiving 
an  antagonism  toward  Clinton,  presumably  because  the 
latter  was  a  "practical"  politician,  Mr.  Verplanck 
employed  his  brilliant  literary  talents  in  writing  for  the 
press  a  series  of  political  papers  attacking  him  with 
great  severity.  They  were  not  all,  it  is  true,  directed 
against  Clinton.  Some,  written  from  the  Federalist 
point  of  view,  were  addressed  to  the  Federalists,  of 
whom  indeed  Mr.  Verplanck  was  one,  dissuading  them 
from  the  Hartford  Convention  folly  and  urging  them 
loyally  to  support  the  government.  But  those  attacking 
Clinton  attracted  most  attention  and  had  most  effect. 
The  articles  were  signed  "Abimelech  Coody,"  and  pur- 
ported to  be  written  by  a  mechanic  of  that  name. 

These  articles  did  not  pass  without  reply  from  Clin- 
ton himself,  who  wrote  over  the  signature  of  "Travel- 
ler." He  attributed  Verplanck's  enmity  to  the  fact  that 
while  Clinton  was  Mayor  and  Verplanck  was  a  student 
in  Columbia  College,  the  latter  was  indicted  for  leader- 
ship in  a  students'  riot.  "He  has  become,"  con- 
tinued Clinton,  "the  head  of  a  political  sect  called  the 
'Goodies,'  of  hybrid  nature,  composed  of  the  combined 
spawn  of  Federalism  and  Jacobinism,  and  generated  in 
the  venomous  passions  of  disappointment  and  revenge, 
without  any  definite  character;  neither  fish  nor  flesh, 
nor  bird  nor  beast,  but  a  nondescript  made  up  of  'all 


1815]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  375 

monstrous,  all  prodigious  things.' '  The  name  of 
"Goodies,"  thus  given,  stuck  to  Verplanck  and  his 
associates  for  many  years.  , 

Now  there  was  by  nature  nothing  in  common  between 
Verplanck  and  his  chosen  few  on  the  one  hand  and  the 
"machine  politicians"  of  Martling's  Long  Room  on  the 
other.  Yet  in  their  common  hostility  to  DeWitt  Clin- 
ton a  common  ground  of  close  alliance  was  found 
between  the  "Goodies"  and  Tammany  Hall.  This 
alliance  was  confirmed  when  Tammany  agreed  to  sup- 
port Judge  Radcliff,  who  was  one  of  the  "Goodies," 
for  the  Mayoralty  in  place  of  Clinton.  Judge  Spencer 
also  joined  the  combination,  making  the  alliance  tri- 
partite. Pressure  was  first  brought  to  bear  upon  Lucas 
Elmendorff,  who  as  a  college  man  of  intellectual  pro- 
clivities was  receptive  to  the  approaches  of  the 
"Goodies,"  and  who  finally  agreed  to  vote  for  displac- 
ing Clinton  with  Radcliff  provided  the  remaining 
member  of  the  Council,  Hubbard,  would  do  the  same 
and  thus  make  the  vote  unanimous. 

Now,  Ruggles  Hubbard  had  been  elected  to  the  Sen- 
ate as  a  Clintonian.  But  he  was  a  man  of  loose  morals, 
spendthrift  habits,  and  weak  will,  habitually  embar- 
rassed with  debts.  When,  therefore,  emissaries  from 
Martling's  Long  Room  promised  him  the  office  of 
Sheriff  of  New  York,  worth  ten  thousand  dollars  a 
year,  if  he  would  vote  against  Clinton,  he  quickly 
yielded  to  the  bribe.  So  the  detestable  "deal"  was 
carried  through.  Tammany  insisted,  however,  upon 
first  making  the  grand  sachem  of  that  order,  John 
Ferguson,  Mayor,  until  he  could  be  appointed  Sur- 


376  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1815 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

veyor  of  the  Port,  after  which  Judge  Radcliff  was 
made  Mayor.  Hubbard  was  made  Sheriff,  and  if  he 
did  not  pay  all  his  debts  he  was  at  least  free  from 
annoyance  by  his  creditors. 

With  these  transactions  DeWitt  Clinton  disappeared 
for  a  time — his  foes  fondly  hoped  it  would  prove  to  be 
forever — from  public  life.  He  even  withdrew  from 
his  home  in  New  York  and  went  into  retirement  in  the 
remote  rural  village  of  Newtown,  Long  Island,  abjured 
politics,  and  devoted  his  attention  to  literary  and 
scholarly  pursuits.  His  removal  from  New  York  was 
probably  a  matter  of  pecuniary  necessity.  He  had 
lost  most  of  his  fortune,  and  he  had  followed  no  business 
nor  profession  in  which  he  could  amass  a  competence, 
but  had  depended  for  support  chiefly  upon  his  official 
salary.  His  own  family  was  large,  and  he  sought  to 
give  its  members  the  best  obtainable  education,  and 
there  were  other  relatives  and  friends  hanging  upon 
him.  While  not  recklessly  extravagant,  he  had  been 
compelled  by  his  official  and  social  position  to  spend 
his  income  freely,  and  his  lack  of  businesslike  system 
in  domestic  economy  made  his  disbursements  larger 
than  they  should  have  been.  The  result  was  that  when 
he  was  turned  out  of  the  Mayoralty  he  was  heavily 
in  debt  and  almost  as  insolvent  as  the  wretched  Hub- 
bard  who  had  betrayed  him.  Naturally,  therefore,  he 
sought  the  seclusion  and  the  economies  of  Newtown  as 
a  matter  of  necessity.  But,  as  was  said  half  a  century 
later  of  a  far  greater  man,  "he  knew  to  bide  his  time." 

Meantime  Governor  Tompkins  was  in  the  enjoyment 
of  great  and  well-deserved  political  prosperity.  He 


1815]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  377 

was  free  from  the  blame  of  Clinton's  apparent  ruin, 
and  had  shrewdly  avoided  incurring  embarrassments 
in  other  directions.  His  popularity  in  New  York  was 
very  great,  and  it  was  by  no  means  inconsiderable  in 
all  the  States  of  the  Union.  He  had  the  favor  of 
President  Madison  who,  although  disappointed  in  his 
declination  of  the  invitation  to  enter  the  cabinet,  still 
wished  the  Presidential  succession  to  pass  to  him  rather 
than  to  Monroe.  There  was,  save  for  a  single  circum- 
stance, every  prospect  that  it  would  pass  to  him.  But 
that  one  exception,  though  for  the  time  overlooked  by 
him,  was  formidable  and  eventually  proved  fatal  to 
him.  That  was  the  opposition  of  Ambrose  Spencer. 
Though  wearing  the  ermine  of  the  highest  judicial 
bench,  he  remained  one  of  the  most  active,  most 
ambitious,  and  most  influential  politicians  in  the  State, 
versed  in  every  trick  of  the  politician's  art,  and  with 
an  unfailing  readiness  to  be  the  friend  or  the  foe  of  any 
man  for  the  furtherance  of  his  own  ends.  Rightly  or 
wrongly,  he  charged  Tompkins  with  prime  responsi- 
bility for  the  defeat  of  his  proteges,  Woodworth  and 
Jenkins,  and  above  all  his  own  defeat  for  the  United 
States  Senatorship.  Thereafter  he  bent  all  the  power 
and  resources  of  his  great  intellectual  ability  to  the 
compassing  of  Tompkins's  discomfiture,  with  such 
results  as  we  shall  presently  see. 

Meantime  the  Thirty-eighth  Legislature  pursued  an 
interesting  course.  The  Governor  on  February  23 
reported,  in  a  special  message,  the  treaty  of  Ghent, 
and,  on  the  recommendation  of  the  Assembly,  he 
appointed  a  day  of  public  thanksgiving,  coinciding  with 


378  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1815 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

that  designated  by  President  Madison.  He  also  at  the 
same  time  reported  that  the  Federal  government  had 
contracted  for  the  purchase  of  a  farm  near  Plattsburgh, 
on  Lake  Champlain,  for  army  camp  purposes,  and 
solicited  the  assent  of  the  Legislature — an  incident 
which  may  be  regarded  as  the  remote  foreshadowing 
of  the  invaluable  enterprise  at  the  same  place  which 
was  organized  by  General  Leonard  Wood  in  the  days 
of  the  Great  War.  An  act  was  passed  providing  for 
the  cession  of  land  to  the  government  for  military  pur- 
poses. The  Legislature  disapproved  a  number  of 
amendments  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
which  had  been  proposed  by  the  Legislatures  of  Massa- 
chusetts, Connecticut,  and  Georgia.  These  would  have 
required  a  two-thirds  vote  of  Congress  for  the  admis- 
sion of  a  new  State,  for  the  imposing  of  an  embargo, 
or  for  a  declaring  of  war;  would  have  excluded 
naturalized  citizens  from  all  civil  offices,  would  have 
restricted  the  President  to  a  single  term,  and  would 
have  forbidden  the  election  of  a  President  from  the 
same  State  twice  in  succession.  The  session  adjourned 
without  day  on  April  18,  1815. 

The  legislative  elections  of  the  spring  of  1815 
showed  the  effects  of  the  intestine  feuds  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party,  and  particularly  of  the  scandalous  per- 
formances in  New  York  City,  where  Clinton  had  been 
removed  from  the  Mayoralty  which  he  had  filled  more 
efficiently  and  acceptably  than  any  other  incumbent  of 
the  office  down  to  that  time,  and  the  unspeakable  Hub- 
bard  had  been  pitchforked  into  the  Sheriff's  office. 
The  city  sent  a  solid  Federalist  delegation  to  the 


1816]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  379 

Assembly,  and  this,  with  some  Federalist  gains  else- 
where in  the  State,  was  sufficient  to  divide  the  new 
house  evenly  between  the  parties,  each  securing  sixty- 
three  members.  The  Democrats  retained  control  of 
the  Senate. 

In  consequence  of  this  result  at  the  polls,  the  organ- 
ization of  the  Thirty-ninth  Legislature  was  marked  with 
such  confusion  and  intrigue  as  had  never  before  been 
known  in  the  State.  The  session  was,  by  law,  to  begin 
on  January  30,  1816.  But  not  all  the  members  were 
present  on  that  day,  and  as  there  were  more  Demo- 
crats present  than  Federalists,  if  a  meeting  had  been 
held  the  former  would  have  elected  one  of  their  num- 
ber Speaker  and  would  have  organized  the  Assembly 
as  they  pleased.  All  the  Federalists  accordingly 
absented  themselves  from  the  chamber,  thus  preventing 
the  counting  of  a  quorum.  The  next  day  all  members 
were  present  save  three,  who  were  away  by  illness,  and 
a  meeting  was  held  at  which  the  Democrats  elected 
Daniel  Cruger  to  the  Speakership  by  a  majority  of  one 
vote,  62  to  61 — Mr.  Cruger  voting  for  himself.  Aaron 
Clark,  Democrat,  was  elected  Clerk. 

There  immediately  thereafter  arose  a  contest  for  a 
seat  as  a  member  from  Ontario  county.  Peter  Allen, 
Democrat,  had  received  a  certificate  of  election  from 
the  County  Clerk,  but  his  right  to  it  was  contested  by 
Henry  Fellows,  a  Federalist.  It  appeared  that  Fel- 
lows had  actually  received  a  majority  of  thirty  votes. 
But  in  one  town,  where  he  received  forty-nine  votes, 
the  Town  Clerk  wrote  his  name  in  the  certificate  in  full, 
"Henry  Fellows,"  while  the  inspectors  in  the  duplicate 


380  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1816 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

return  abbreviated  it  to  "Hen.  Fellows."  Although 
there  was  of  course  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  both 
forms  of  the  name  referred  to  the  same  man,  the  County 
Clerk  rejected  the  forty-nine  votes  altogether,  and  issued 
the  certificate  to  Allen,  who  was  thus  made  to  have 
nineteen  majority.  As  the  Assembly  was  already  evenly 
divided  between  the  parties,  it  was  obvious  that  upon 
the  decision  of  this  contest  depended  the  political  con- 
trol of  that  body.  William  A.  Duer,  an  eminent  Fed- 
eralist from  Dutchess  county,  presented  the  petition 
of  Mr.  Fellows  and  asked  for  its  immediate  considera- 
tion, but  by  a  party  vote  the  reading  of  it  was  post- 
poned until  the  next  day,  the  Speaker  ruling,  despite 
protests,  that  Allen  had  a  right  to  vote  upon  that 
question. 

A  truce  was  then  made  for  three  days,  when  the 
strife  was  renewed  over  a  Democratic  motion  to  pro- 
ceed at  once  to  the  election  of  a  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment. A  Federalist  motion  was  made  to  postpone 
such  election  until  after  the  contest  over  the  Ontario 
seat  was  decided.  This  latter  motion  the  Speaker  ruled 
out  of  order.  Then  another  Federalist  motion  was 
made  postponing  the  election  for  three  days  and  order- 
ing that  meanwhile  the  seat  contest  be  taken  up  for 
decision.  The  Speaker  permitted  this  to  be  put,  but 
insisted  upon  the  right  of  Peter  Allen  to  vote  upon  it. 
A  motion  was  then  made  that  Mr.  Allen  be  excluded 
from  voting  on  a  question  in  which  he  was  himself 
interested.  This  the  Speaker  ruled  out  of  order,  and 
upon  an  appeal  being  taken  insisted  upon  Mr.  Allen's 
being  permitted  to  vote.  In  such  circumstances  the 


1816]  TOMPKINS'S  THIRD  TERM  381 

vote  was  61  against  the  Speaker's  ruling  and  61  (includ- 
ing Allen's)  for  sustaining  it.  The  Speaker  thereupon 
gave  the  deciding  vote  in  favor  of  himself,  and  declared 
his  ruling  sustained.  Several  other  divisions  were  had, 
in  all  of  which  Allen  was  permitted  to  vote  on  ques- 
tions directly  concerning  himself. 

In  such  fashion  the  Assembly  finally  proceeded  to 
the  election  of  a  Council  of  Appointment,  and  Darius 
Crosby,  William  Ross,  Parley  Keyes,  and  Archibald  S. 
Clark,  all  Democrats,  were  elected — at  least  two  of 
them  owing  their  election  to  the  vote  of  Peter  Allen. 
Then,  the  purpose  of  keeping  Allen  in  his  seat  having 
been  achieved,  the  committee  on  elections  immediately 
reported,  unanimously,  that  Allen  was  not  entitled  to 
his  seat  and  that  Mr.  Fellows  should  be  seated  in  his 
place,  and  that  report  was  adopted  by  the  Assembly 
by  a  vote  of  115  ayes  to  only  a  single  nay — which, 
strange  to  say,  was  not  that  of  Allen  himself!  Since 
that  day  there  have  been  many  contested  seats,  and 
some  of  the  contests  have  been  unjustly  decided;  but 
never  in  the  history  of  New  York,  if  of  any  State,  has 
there  been  a  more  flagrant,  brazen,  and  cynical  perver- 
sion of  right  and  justice  than  in  that  case.  The  Council 
of  Appointment  which  was  thus  fraudulently  elected 
had  little  to  do,  as  practically  all  the  offices  were 
already  rilled  by  Democrats.  The  only  important 
change  was  caused  by  the  resignation  of  the  office  of 
Secretary  of  State  by  General  Porter,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  Robert  Tillotson,  an  excellent  man  and  a  son 
of  the  former  Secretary  of  State,  Dr.  Tillotson,  to  fill 
it. 


382  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1816 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  address  of  the  Governor  at  this  session  of  the 
Legislature  was  largely  devoted  to  topics  suggested  by 
the  war.  In  addition  to  these  he  recommended  prose- 
cution of  the  Erie  and  Champlain  canal  schemes,  and 
the  Legislature  presently  adopted  an  act  for  further 
surveys  and  for  soliciting  Federal  aid.  He  also  recom- 
mended encouragement  of  manufacturers,  and  the  Leg- 
islature passed  an  act  continuing  the  statute  for  the 
chartering  of  corporations.  The  Legislature  adopted 
resolutions  heartily  commending  the  heroic  conduct  of 
Captain  Samuel  Chester  Reid  for  his  defense  of  the 
little  privateer  "General  Armstrong"  at  Fayal,  when  it 
was  attacked  in  neutral  waters  by  an  overwhelming 
British  force;  and  the  Governor  transmitted  them  to 
Captain  Reid  with  a  glowing  letter  of  eulogy  from  his 
own  pen.  The  Legislature  adjourned  without  day  on 
April  17,  1816. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 
TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY 

THE  year  1816  was  big  with  politics,  in  New  York 
and  in  the  nation.  It  was  the  duodecennial  year, 
in  which  both  a  President  of  the  United  States 
and  a  Governor  of  New  York  were  to  be  chosen;  and 
for  both  offices  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  was  a  candidate. 
As  early  as  February  14  a  caucus  of  the  Democratic 
members  of  the  Legislature,  under  the  leadership  of 
Martin  Van  Buren,  unanimously  instructed  the  New 
York  Representatives  in  Congress  to  vote  for  him  in 
the  Congressional  caucus  for  the  Presidency;  though, 
as  we  shall  see,  the  same  foxy  leader  afterward  pre- 
vented them  from  doing  so.  A  week  later  the  Albany 
caucus  unanimously  renominated  Tompkins  for  the 
Governorship,  for  his  fourth  term,  and  also  Mr.  Tayler 
for  the  Lieutenant-Governorship.  Tompkins  probably 
had  little  or  no  desire  to  be  reflected  Governor,  because 
if  elected  President  he  would  have  to  resign  that  office. 
But  he  felt  that  it  was  necessary  for  him  to  make  the 
run  in  order  to  prevent  the  Federalists  from  carrying 
the  State.  We  have  seen  that  in  the  elections  of  1815 
the  Federalists  made  great  gains.  They  were  in  fact 
so  great  as  to  encourage  them  to  hope  for  a  complete 
victory  in  1816. 

It  had  been  the  purpose  of  the  Federalists  to  nomi- 
nate William  P.  Van  Ness  for  the  Governorship.  But 
this  plan  was  abandoned  as  soon  as  the  Democrats, 

383 


384  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1816 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

through  the  illegal  vote  of  Peter  Allen,  secured  con- 
tinued control  of  the  Council  of  Appointment;  because 
if  Van  Ness  resigned  his  place  on  the  bench,  the  Coun- 
cil would  fill  it  with  a  Democrat.  So  Rufus  King, 
then  a  United  States  Senator,  was  nominated.  His  dis- 
tinguished abilities,  high  character,  and  immense  pres- 
tige made  him  the  most  formidable  candidate  that  could 
be  put  into  the  field,  and  the  ticket  was  further 
strengthened  by  the  naming  of  George  Tibbits.  of  Troy, 
for  Lieutenant-Governor.  So  strong  was  this  ticket 
felt  to  be  that  there  was  little  hope  of  any  Democrat 
winning  against  it  save  Tompkins  himself.  Accord- 
ingly he  accepted  the  renomination  and  made  the  race. 
The  result  demonstrated  the  wisdom  of  his  course. 
The  Federalists  waged  an  aggressive  campaign,  keep- 
ing the  Democrats  everywhere  continually  on  the  defen- 
sive, and  it  was  confessedly  nothing  but  Tompkins's 
personal  popularity  and  charm  that  saved  the  day  for 
him.  The  result  of  the  polling  was  45,412  for  Tomp- 
kins, and  38,647  for  King.  Against  any  other  Demo- 
crat in  the  State,  King  would  have  had  an  easy  victory. 
That  reelection  marked  the  zenith  of  Tompkins's 
career.  His  administration  was  in  its  ninth  year  and 
was  about  to  be  prolonged  to  its  twelfth.  It  had  been 
singularly  free  from  scandals  of  any  kind,  and  had  been 
marked  with  some  of  the  finest  patriotic  devotion  in  our 
country's  history.  Every  favorable  anticipation  of  the 
Governor  had  been  abundantly  fulfilled.  Political 
opponents  as  well  as  followers  acclaimed  his  purity  of 
life,  his  courage  of  action,  his  unselfishness  in  patriot- 
ism, and  his  elevation  of  statesmanship.  Of  all  the 


WILLIAM  JAY 

William  Jay,  jurist;  born  New  York  City,  June  16,  1789; 
graduate  from  Yale,  1808;  studied  law;  appointed  by  Governor 
Clinton  first  judge  of  Westchester  county,  1820;  elected  and 
held  office  until  superceded  by  Governor  Bouck  at  the  in- 
stance of  the  pro-slavery  element  in  1843 ;  opposed  extension 
of  slavery  in  1826  and  thereafter;  leader  of  the  society  of 
friends;  wrote  many  books  on  legal  and  religious  subjects; 
died  at  Bedford,  N.  Y.,  October  14,  1858. 


1816]  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  385 

candidates  at  that  time  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States,  there  was  not  one  more  fit  than  he,  if  indeed 
there  was  any  other  quite  so  fit. 

Yet  because  of  that  very  fitness  he  was  doomed  to 
defeat.  Had  he  been  less  high-minded,  had  he  been 
less  a  statesman  and  patriot  and  more  a  politician  and 
partisan,  he  might  have  succeeded.  For  in  that  case 
he  might  have  placated  Ambrose  Spencer,  and  have 
held  Martin  Van  Buren  true  in  his  interests.  As  it 
was,  he  was  openly  opposed  by  the  one  and  was  betrayed 
by  the  other;  and  they  were  the  two  most  influential 
politicians  in  the  State  at  that  time.  If  it  be  not  unkind 
to  advert  to  one  of  the  frailties  of  a  great  man,  what 
we  have  said  of  his  relations  with  Van  Buren  may  be 
repeated  concerning  those  with  Madison. 

There  were  in  1816  three  principal  candidates  for 
the  Presidency:  Tompkins,  Monroe,  and  Crawford. 
Morally,  Tompkins  was  by  far  the  best  of  the  three. 
For  while  the  others  were  men  of  generally  high 
character,  it  is  impossible  to  forget  the  discreditable 
performances  of  Monroe  while  he  was  Minister  to 
France,  or  the  disingenuous — to  use  no  harsher  term- 
intrigues  of  Crawford  in  the  Monroe  cabinet,  as  a 
result  of  which  there  were  entailed  upon  us  the  Texas 
controversy  and  the  Mexican  War.  Intellectually, 
Crawford  may  have  outranked  the  others,  though  his 
margin  above  Tompkins  was  certainly  not  large.  Mon- 
roe surpassed  the  others  in  "practical  politics,"  but  was 
objected  to  by  many  because  his  election  would  mean 
the  continuance  of  the  "Virginia  dynasty."  , 


386  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

We  have  said  that  Madison  at  first  desired  Tomp- 
kins  to  be  his  successor.  He  had  that  in  mind  when 
he  asked  the  Governor  to  become  Secretary  of  State. 
He  continued  to  cherish  the  same  design  for  a  time 
after  Tompkins's  patriotic  declination  of  that  invita- 
tion— partly  because  of  gratitude  for  the  simply  incal- 
culable services  which  Tompkins  rendered  to  him  in 
the  support  of  the  war,  and  partly  because  of  his  per- 
sonal dislike  of  Monroe.  But  by  the  beginning  of  1816 
his  sentiments,  or  least  his  purposes,  had  changed.  He 
was  still  grateful  to  Tompkins,  but  he  could  have  no 
further  need  of  his  services — and  has  not  a  cynical  phil- 
osopher told  us  that  gratitude  is  an  anticipation  of 
favors  yet  to  come?  He  disliked  Monroe,  but  after 
all  Monroe  was  a  Virginian.  So  presently  the  word 
went  forth  that  Federal  office-holders  everywhere  were 
to  support  Monroe's  candidacy,  and  that  those  in  New 
York  were  to  attack  and  discourage  the  candidacy  of 
Tompkins.  Thus  Solomon  Southwick  was  appointed 
postmaster  at  Albany  for  the  chief  purpose  of  having 
him  revile  and  lampoon  Tompkins  and  laud  and  sup- 
port Monroe  in  his  paper,  the  Register. 

Van  Buren's  part  in  Tompkins's  defeat  was  con- 
siderable, though  it  was  veiled  in  subtlety,  as  were  most 
of  the  political  acts  of  that  past  master  of  furtive  and 
devious  intrigue.  He  did  lead  the  Legislative  caucus 
to  direct  the  Representatives  to  support  Tompkins. 
But  when  the  caucus  met  he  saw  to  it  that  the  New  York 
members  did  not  fulfill  the  instructions  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. Had  they  solidly  and  aggressively  declared 
themselves  for  Tompkins,  he  might  have  been  nomi- 


1816]  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  387 

nated.  Instead,  they  "played  a  waiting  game,"  declin- 
ing to  commit  themselves  until  they  could  ascertain 
the  general  drift  of  sentiment.  The  outcome  of  it  was 
that  nobody  knew  or  cared  how  they  finally  voted, 
and  again,  as  had  happened  several  times  before  from 
similar  causes,  the  influence  of  the  greatest  State  in 
the  Union  was  frittered  away  into  nothingness.  What- 
ever Tompkins,  in  the  magnanimity  of  his  generous 
nature,  may  have  thought  of  Van  Buren's  performance, 
there  was  no  question  what  Tompkins's  successful  rival 
thought  of  it.  Monroe  felt  that  he  owed  his  nomina- 
tion to  Van  Buren,  and  acted  upon  that  feeling. 

Ambrose  Spencer  was  from  first  to  last  an  outspoken 
advocate  of  the  nomination  of  Crawford.  That  was 
not  because  he  had  any  special  predilection  for  the 
Georgian.  But  he  was  bitterly  opposed  to  Tompkins, 
and  he  did  not  deem  it  good  policy  to  support  Mon- 
roe because  of  the  widespread  antipathy  to  the  "Vir- 
ginia dynasty"  which  prevailed  throughout  New  York, 
save  among  the  Federal  office-holders.  For  that  antip- 
athy there  was  of  course  good  cause.  For  six  terms 
out  of  seven,  for  twenty-four  years  out  of  twenty-eight, 
the  Presidency  had  been  occupied  by  a  Virginian. 
It  was  high  time  for  a  President  to  be  chosen  from 
some  other  State,  and  from  a  northern  State.  Indeed, 
New  York,  which  by  this  time  had  passed  Virginia  and 
become  the  first  State  of  the  Union  in  population,  might 
well  have  been  regarded  as  entitled  to  the  honor,  which 
a  majority  of  the  other  States  would  have  ungrudgingly 
accorded  to  it.  But  as  had  been  the  case  once  or  twice 
before,  and  as  has  been  the  case  several  times  since, 


388  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1816 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

New  York's  interests  were  sacrificed  by  jealousies  and 
factional  or  personal  animosities  among  New  Yorkers 
themselves.  So  on  grounds  of  personal  spite  Judge 
Spencer,  the  most  powerful  political  leader  in  the  State, 
threw  all  his  influence  against  the  New  York  candi- 
date and  in  favor  not,  indeed,  of  a  Virginian,  but  of 
a  man  from  still  farther  south.  In  this  Spencer  was 
aided  by  John  Armstrong,  who  of  course  was  bitter 
against  Madison  and  Monroe  as  well  as  against 
Tompkins. 

It  was  indeed  due  to  the  influence  and  the  intrigues 
of  Spencer  that  Van  Buren  was  enabled  to  play  his 
double  game  with  the  Congressional  delegation.  For 
while  Van  Buren  could  control  the  Legislature,  the 
Representatives  in  Congress  took  their  orders  from 
Spencer.  While,  therefore,  they  were  instructed  by  the 
Legislature  to  support  Tompkins,  they  were  instructed 
by  Spencer  to  support  Crawford.  Between  the  two, 
they  were  quite  willing  to  do  nothing.  When  the  mem- 
bers of  Congress  assembled  at  Washington  and  the 
time  arrived  for  the  caucus,  an  informal  canvass  showed 
that  Crawford  was  decidedly  in  the  lead.  "I  have 
not  a  particle  of  doubt,"  says  Jabez  Hammond,  who 
was  very  intimately  concerned  in  the  whole  business, 
being  himself  one  of  the  New  York  Representatives  in 
Congress,  "that  as  between  Crawford  and  Monroe,  a 
majority  were  in  favor  of  the  former."  But  the  admin- 
istration faction,  favorable  to  Monroe,  quickly  and 
energetically  busied  itself  and  secured  postponement 
of  the  caucus  until  "influence"  of  some  sort  could  be 
applied  to  enough  members  to  make  a  majority  for 


1816]  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  389 

Monroe.  The  result  was,  when  the  caucus  was  finally 
held,  that  Monroe  received  65  votes  and  Crawford  54. 
None  were  cast  for  Tompkins. 

That  this  was  a  bitter  disappointment  to  Tompkins 
goes  without  saying.  Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  he  had 
ample  ground  for  feeling  that  he  had  been  betrayed  by 
those  of  his  own  household.  But  just  as  in  the  hour 
of  his  greatest  power  and  triumph  he  had  been  mag- 
nanimous and  generous  to  his  foes,  so  in  the  hour  of 
adversity  and  betrayal  he  exhibited  an  admirable 
equanimity.  A  smaller  man  would,  in  those  circum- 
stances, have  refused  with  resentment  the  "consolation 
prize"  of  the  Vice-Presidency,  which  was  offered  to 
him.  And  indeed  even  he  might  not  unworthily  have 
declined  it,  preferring  to  remain  as  Governor  of  New 
York.  But  he  was  unwilling  to  incur  even  the  appear- 
ance of  pique,  and  he  had  already  expressed  his  dis- 
inclination to  serve  longer  as  Governor,  and  therefore 
he  unhesitatingly  accepted  the  nomination  for  Vice- 
President.  That  did  not,  however,  require  his  imme- 
diate retirement  from  the  Governorship,  to  which,  as 
we  have  seen,  he  was  reelected  for  his  fourth  time  in 
the  spring  of  1816. 

At  that  election,  because  of  the  personal  popularity 
and  prestige  of  Tompkins,  the  Democrats  regained  the 
strength  in  the  Legislature  which  they  had  lost  in  the 
preceding  year.  New  York  City  returned  to  the  Demo- 
cratic ranks,  and  that  party  thus  secured  more  than 
two-thirds  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly.  All  the 
Senators  elected  were  Democrats,  excepting  those  from 


390  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1816-17 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Eastern  district;  a  result  which  was  in  part  due  to 
its  reapportionment  of  the  State  which  had  been  made, 
and  which  had  transferred  Albany,  Otsego,  Schoharie, 
and  Chenango  counties  to  the  Middle  district. 

The  new  Legislature,  the  Fortieth,  met  in  special 
session  on  November  5,  1816,  for  the  choice  of  Presi- 
dential Electors.  David  Woods,  Democrat,  was  chosen 
Speaker  by  84  votes  to  33  for  James  Emott,  Federalist. 
The  Governor's  address  betrayed  no  trace  of  political 
feeling,  but  was  confined  to  a  few  non-political  topics, 
chief  among  them  being  the  very  urgent  need  of  prison 
reform.  As  a  result  of  his  wise  recommendations  the 
Legislature  enacted  a  measure  providing  for  the 
employment  of  convicts  at  useful  labor,  not  alone  in 
shops  within  the  prison  walls  but  also  on  the  roads  and 
canals  in  various  parts  of  the  State.  The  session  was 
adjourned  on  November  12. 

The  regular  session  of  the  same  Legislature  began 
on  January  14,  1817,  and  the  Governor's  address,  the 
last  which  Mr.  Tompkins  was  to  deliver,  was  devoted 
to  the  one  subject  of  the  abolition  of  slavery,  a  reform 
which  he  advocated  with  convincing  earnestness.  Fol- 
lowing his  enlightened  leadership  the  Legislature 
enacted  a  bill  providing,  in  exact  accordance  with  his 
recommendation,  that  on  and  after  July  4,  1827,  human 
slavery  should  forever  cease  and  be  abolished  in  the 
State  of  New  York.  This  was  the  crowning  achieve- 
ment of  Governor  Tompkins's  administration  as  the 
Chief  Executive  of  New  York,  and  to  it  he  is  entitled 
to  full,  sole,  and  absolute  credit,  despite  the  fact  that 


18173  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  391 

the  dilatory  Legislature  delayed  actually  passing  the 
measure  until  after  he  had  presented  his  resignation  of 
the  Governorship.  We  must,  of  course,  remember 
with  gratitude  the  men  who  had  for  some  time  been 
advocating  that  great  reform,  conspicuous  among  them 
being  Cadwallader  D.  Golden,  William  Jay,  Peter 
Augustus  Jay,  and  several  leaders  of  the  Society  of 
Friends.  But  all  their  efforts  would  have  failed,  or 
at  least  would  have  been  indefinitely  postponed,  had  it 
not  been  for  the  sympathetic  cooperation  and  leader- 
ship of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins. 

It  was  one  of  the  most  lamentable  tragedies  of  New 
York  politics  that  this  achievement — Hammond,  who 
had  little  love  for  him,  calls  it  "godlike" — was  not 
permitted  to  be  the  final  act  of  Tompkins  in  public 
life.  He  himself  intended  it  to  be,  at  least  so  far  as 
this  State  was  concerned.  Martin  Van  Buren,  indeed, 
considered  a  plan,  quite  characteristic  of  himself,  to 
have  Tompkins  retain  the  Governorship  while  serving 
as  Vice-President.  There  was  apparently  no  constitu- 
tional or  legal  prohibition  of  such  an  arrangement. 
But  Tompkins  rejected  the  suggestion  with  scorn.  On 
February  24  he  sent  to  the  Legislature  his  resignation 
of  the  Governorship.  It  was  accepted,  of  course,  and 
each  house  adopted  resolutions  appreciative  of  his  ser- 
vices to  the  State.  These  might  be  described  as  lauda- 
tory, though  it  was  not  possible  for  any  praise  to  be 
too  high  for  a  character  and  a  career  which  thus  far, 
during  many  years  of  more  than  ordinarily  strenuous 
labors  and  conflicts,  had  been  "without  fear  and  with- 


392  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

out  reproach."  From  Albany  he  passed  to  Washing- 
ton, where  he  greatly  adorned  the  Vice-Presidency  of 
the  nation  and  the  presidency  of  the  United  States 
Senate. 

A  little  later,  partisan  spite  hawked  at  him  and 
maligned  his  character  with  abominable  insinuations, 
and  partisan  exigencies  dragged  him  back  into  the 
ruck  of  factional  strife,  with  the  result  that  his  life 
was  clouded  with  trouble  and  disaster  and  was  untimely 
ended.  Upon  those  lamentable  occurrences  we  must 
hereafter  touch  in  their  due  order.  They  were  an 
unwelcome  epilogue  to  a  great  career  which  logically 
ended  in  February,  1817. 

Meantime,  the  certainty  that  Tompkins  would 
resign  the  Governorship  had  caused  much  perturba- 
tion among  the  politicians  of  the  State,  and  particularly 
in  Tompkins's  own  wing  of  the  Democratic  party,  of 
which  Van  Bur^n  was  the  leader.  This  was  due  to  the 
prospect  that  DeWitt  Clinton  would  return  to  activity 
and  to  power,  and  become  Governor  of  the  State. 
That  extraordinary  man  had  lately  been,  as  we  have 
seen,  expelled  from  office  and  practically  ruined  in  his 
private  fortunes.  But  at  the  irresistible  demand  of 
the  public  he  had  been  made  the  head,  in  January,  1816, 
of  a  new  Canal  commission,  which  went  to  work  so 
efficiently  as  greatly  to  restore  his  prestige  and  to  recom- 
mend him  to  popular  favor.  Then  a  reconciliation  was 
effected  between  him  and  Ambrose  Spencer,  partly 
through  the  mediation  of  Mrs.  Spencer,  who  was 
Clinton's  sister,  and  partly  because  Spencer  realized 
that  he  needed  Clinton's  aid  in  his  own  fight  with 


1817]  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  393 

Tompkins  and  Van  Buren.  So  it  came  to  pass  that 
when  the  Legislature  of  1817  met,  it  was  found  that 
there  was  a  formidable  sentiment  in  favor  of  Clinton 
for  the  Governorship. 

That  was  the  circumstance  which  moved  Van  Buren 
in  desperation  to  consider  the  plan  of  having  Tomp- 
kins hold  two  offices.  Finding  that  Tompkins  would 
not  listen  to  that,  Van  Buren  resorted  to  another  device 
which  in  later  years  would  have  been  adopted  as  a 
matter  of  course,  but  which  then,  under  the  old  Con- 
stitution, was  of  dubious  propriety  and  legality.  That 
was,  that  the  Lieutenant-Governor  should  act  as  Gov- 
ernor for  the  remainder  of  the  term.  That,  of  course, 
is  what  would  be  done  to-day.  It  was  what  one  clause 
of  the  old  Constitution  apparently  contemplated,  pro- 
viding that  the  Lieutenant-Governor  should  exercise  all 
the  functions  of  the  office  of  Governor  "until  another 
be  chosen."  So  Van  Buren  urged  that  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  should  serve  until  the  next  regular  time  for 
a  Gubernatorial  election.  But  another  clause  of  the 
Constitution  provided  that  as  often  as  the  Governor- 
ship became  vacant  some  one  should  be  elected  to  fill 
it.  Reluctantly,  therefore,  Van  Buren  accepted  the 
inevitable;  and  the  Legislature  passed  by  overwhelm- 
ing majorities  in  both  houses  a  bill  which  had  been 
suggested  by  Tompkins  in  his  letter  of  resignation,  pro- 
viding for  the  election  of  a  new  Governor  at  the  April 
election  of  1817. 

Meantime,  of  course,  John  Tayler,  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  exercised  the  functions  of  the  office  from 
the  date  of  Tompkins's  resignation  to  that  of  the  instal- 


394  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

lation  of  his  elected  successor.  Mr.  Tayler  was  a  man 
of  limited  education  but  of  high  character  and  fine 
natural  intelligence  and  shrewdness.  He  did  not 
regard  himself  as  having  succeeded  to  the  Governor- 
ship, and  never  took  the  oath  of  office  as  Governor,  but 
served  as  Acting-Governor  under  the  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor's oath.  He  was  always  described  in  official 
documents  during  the  four  months  of  his  incumbency  as 
Lieutenant-Governor,  though  Federal  officials  appear 
to  have  addressed  him  as  Governor. 

The  most  important  act  of  the  Fortieth  Legislature 
after  the  resignation  of  Governor  Tompkins  and  the 
enactment  of  the  emancipation  measure  which  he  had 
urged,  was  that  of  April  15,  1817,  which  fully  com- 
mitted the  State  to  the  canal  project  which  DeWitt 
Clinton  had  been  urging.  That  was  adopted  by  prac- 
tically a  two-thirds  vote  of  both  houses,  those  in  favor 
of  it  being  Clintonian  Democrats  and  Federalists,  and 
those  in  opposition  being  the  Tammany  Democrats  of 
New  York  City  and  Van  Buren's  followers  elsewhere. 
Of  course  its  adoption  was  a  great  triumph  for  Clinton 
and  materially  strengthened  his  campaign  for  the  Gov- 
ernorship, which  was  then  drawing  to  a  close.  The 
Legislature  adjourned  without  day  immediately  after 
the  passage  of  that  bill. 

The  new  Council  of  Appointment  was  elected  on 
February  13,  and  in  its  composition  was  another  tri- 
umph for  Clinton.  Its  members  were  Walter  Bowne 
of  the  Southern,  John  Noyes  of  the  Middle,  John  I. 
Prendergast  of  the  Eastern,  and  Henry  Bloom  of  the 
Western  district.  The  first-named  was  under  the 


1817]  TOMPKINS  AND  THE  PRESIDENCY  395 

influence  of  Tammany  Hall,  and  was  in  consequence 
unfriendly  to  Clinton,  but  the  others  were  all  followers 
of  Judge  Spencer,  and  in  consequence,  upon  his  recon- 
ciliation with  Clinton,  became  staunch  supporters  of  the 
latter.  Only  one  important  change  in  office  was  made, 
but  of  course  such  influence  as  was  exerted  by  the 
Council  through  its  patronage  was  favorable  to  Clin- 
ton. The  one  change  referred  to  was  the  removal  of 
Robert  Tillotson  from  the  office  of  Secretary  of  State 
and  the  appointment  of  Charles  D.  Cooper  in  his  place ; 
which  was  done  while  Mr.  Bowne  was  absent  from  a 
meeting  of  the  Council.  Mr.  Tillotson  had  filled  th 
place  admirably  and  Dr.  Cooper  filled  it  admirably 
after  him.  There  was  no  political  reason  for  the 
change,  or  any  public  reason,  but  it  seems  to  have 
been  made  solely  because  Dr.  Cooper  had  married  the 
adopted  daughter  of  Lieutenant-Governor  Tayler,  who 
at  that  time,  as  Acting-Governor,  was  president  of 
the  Council.  It  was  simply  a  bit  of  nepotism  and 
"honest  graft." 


CHAPTER  XIX 
THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON 

DE  WITT  CLINTON,  we  have  said,  "knew  to 
bide  his  time,"  and  his  time  came  at  last.  It 
began  to  dawn  in  the  fall  of  1815,  when  a  great 
meeting  of  merchants  and  other  citizens  of  New  York 
City  was  held  to  promote  the  scheme  of  a  canal  system 
connecting  the  Hudson  River  with  Lake  Erie  and  Lake 
Champlain.  It  was  largely  due  to  Clinton's  former 
advocacy  of  such  a  scheme  that  the  meeting  was  held. 
It  was  the  sprouting  of  the  seed  which  he  had  planted. 
Fittingly,  therefore,  he  came  from  his  rural  retirement 
and  was  called  upon  to  address  the  gathering.  He  did 
so  in  a  masterly  manner,  setting  forth  not  only  the 
feasibility  of  the  plan  from  an  engineering  point  of 
view,  but  also  the  financial  arrangements  necessary  for 
its  achievement.  With  moving  eloquence  he  declared 
that  the  canal,  in  the  extent  of  its  route,  the  counties 
which  it  traversed  and  connected,  and  the  consequences 
which  it  would  produce,  would  be  without  a  parallel 
in  the  history  of  mankind.  "It  remains,"  he  said,  "for 
a  free  State  to  create  a  new  era  in  history,  and  to  erect 
a  work  more  stupendous,  more  magnificent,  and  more 
beneficial  than  has  hitherto  been  achieved  by  the  human 


race." 


In  that,  as  the  event  showed,  there  was  no  exaggera 
tion;  and  such  was  the  contagious  power  of  Clinton's 
eloquence  that  he  was  able  to  impart  to  others  his  splen- 

396 


THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  397 

did  vision.  The  meeting  in  New  York  adopted  a 
powerfully-worded  memorial  to  the  Legislature,  and 
appointed  Clinton  chairman  of  a  committee  to  pre- 
sent it  to  that  body  personally.  His  journey  from 
New  York  to  Albany  resembled  the  progress  of  a  tri- 
umphant monarch,  with  great  mass-meetings  and  fa- 
vorable memorials  at  every  town,  and  when  he  reached 
Albany  and  presented  the  address  from  the  New  York 
meeting  the  Legislature  could  do  nothing  else  than 
create  the  new  Canal  commission  which  was  asked 
for  and  make  Clinton  its  head. 

A  year  later  Clinton  was  able  to  present  the  com- 
mission's report  of  the  canal  project,  in  finished  form 
and  at  the  psychological  moment.  The  Champlain 
canal  was  estimated  to  cost  only  $871,000.  The  Erie 
canal  was  a  stupendous  work.  It  was  to  be  350  miles 
long  and  forty  feet  wide,  with  no  fewer  than  seventy- 
seven  lifting  locks,  and  its  cost  was  estimated  at  $4,571,- 
813.  The  sum  needed  for  both  was  nearly  five  and  a 
half  million  dollars,  a  huge  sum  for  those  times.  But 
Clinton  confidently  declared  that  the  funds  could  be 
obtained  by  a  loan,  which  could  be  repaid  from  the 
profits  of  the  canals  without  a  dollar  of  taxation  upon 
the  State.  We  have  seen  that  he  was  not  a  successful 
financier  in  his  personal  and  domestic  affairs.  In  this 
great  public  business  he  showed  himself  a  master  of 
finance.  He  impressed  the  Legislature  with  the  sound- 
ness of  his  views,  and  in  consequence  that  body  enacted 
the  measure  to  which  we  have  already  referred,  com- 
mitting the  State  to  the  undertaking. 


398  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

That  action,  taken  less  than  a  fortnight  before  the 
election  of  a  successor  to  Governor  Tompkins,  would  in 
itself  have  been  enough  to  assure  Clinton's  triumph  at 
the  polls  in  almost  any  circumstances.  But  long  before 
that  action  his  election  was  amply  assured.  Down  to 
this  time  candidates  for  the  Governorship  had  been 
selected  by  legislative  party  caucuses.  But  early  in 
1817  Judge  Spencer,  acting  in  Clinton's  interest, 
organized  a  strong  and  successful  revolt  against  that 
system,  and  in  favor  of  a  general  State  nominating 
convention.  The  argument  in  favor  of  the  change 
was  sound  and  quite  unanswerable.  Many  of  the 
counties,  it  was  pointed  out,  were  represented  in  the 
Legislature  by  Senators  and  Assemblymen  of  a  single 
party.  Thus  their  citizens  of  the  other  party,  who 
might  be  very  nearly  a  majority,  were  left  without 
representation.  If  a  certain  county  were  represented 
in  the  Legislature  by  none  but  Federalists,  its  Demo- 
cratic citizens  would  have  no  voice  whatever  in  the 
selection  of  a  candidate  for  Governor. 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that  this  argument  was  put 
forward  and  the  change  of  nominating  methods  was 
demanded  by  Judge  Spencer  chiefly,  if  not  solely,  in 
the  interest  of  Clinton.  Although  Spencer  had  secured 
the  election  of  three  out  of  four  members  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Appointment,  he  was  very  doubtful  whether  he 
could  get  a  majority  of  the  Democratic  legislators  to 
vote  for  Clinton's  nomination  for  Governor,  though 
he  felt  quite  sure  that  he  could  get  a  majority  of  a 
popular  State  convention  to  do  so.  Accordingly,  as 
early  as  February  4  a  convention  was  held  at  Albany, 


1817]  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  399 

at  which  it  was  resolved  that  at  least  in  all  counties 
which  had  no  Democratic  representatives  in  the  Legis- 
lature there  should  be  appointed  Democratic  delegates, 
either  to  a  general  State  convention  of  such  delegates 
from  all  counties,  or  to  the  legislative  caucus  of  Demo- 
cratic Assemblymen  from  other  counties;  and  three 
delegates  were  appointed.  The  example  of  Albany 
was  followed  by  other  counties,  and  on  March  25  the 
first  State  convention  in  New  York  for  nominating  a 
Governor  was  held,  at  Albany. 

In  advance  of  this  there  was  much  activity.  Spencer 
and  the  Clintonians  were  of  course  working  earnestly 
for  Clinton.  On  the  other  hand,  Van  Buren  and  the 
Tammany  managers  in  New  York  City  were  desper- 
ately setting  about  to  find  somebody  to  beat  him  in 
the  convention.  Their  first  choice  was  Joseph  C. 
Yates,  one  of  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and 
a  second  cousin  of  Robert  Yates,  the  former  Chief- 
Justice.  He  was  a  man  of  fine  character  and  ability, 
and  of  much  personal  popularity,  and  had  specially 
commended  himself  to  the  State  by  being  the  chief 
founder  of  Union  College.  But  he  possessed  the  same 
trait  of  political  changeableness  which  had  been  so 
conspicuous  in  his  kinsman,  who  had  been  a  Federalist 
candidate  for  Governor  in  one  election  and  an  An-ti- 
Federalist  candidate  for  the  same  office  in  the  next. 
Joseph  Yates  had  once  been  a  strong  Clintonian,  sup- 
porting DeWitt  Clinton  for  the  Presidency  of  the 
United  States.  Then  he  had  become  an  equally  strong 
supporter  of  Tompkins,  at  a  time  when  the  estrange- 
ment between  him  and  Clinton  was  so  great  that  to  be 


400  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

a  friend  of  one  was  almost  necessarily  tantamount  to 
being  a  foe  of  the  other.  However,  Yates  was  prob- 
ably never  really  hostile  to  Clinton.  It  is  certain  that 
he  was  always  a  hearty  supporter  of  the  canal  scheme. 
Van  Buren's  scheme  was  thus  to  put  forward  a  former 
and  probably  present  friend  of  Clinton  as  Clinton's 
rival,  in  hope  of  thus  drawing  away  others  of  Clinton's 
friends;  and  although  the  opponents  of  Clinton  were 
supposed  to  be  opponents  of  his  canal  scheme,  he  would 
put  forward  a  friend  of  the  canals  in  order  to  win  sup- 
port from  the  canal  party  in  his  campaign  against  the 
canal  leader! 

There  never  was  a  political  intrigue  more  thoroughly 
characteristic  of  Van  Buren's  tortuous  mental  processes 
than  this,  and  never  was  one  more  completely  unsuc- 
cessful. Not  one  of  Clinton's  supporters  was  lured 
away  by  it,  while  many  of  Van  Buren's  own  anti- 
Clinton  contingent  were  so  enraged  at  being  asked  to 
support  a  Clintonian  that  they  deserted  him  and  went 
over  to  the  other  side,  declaring  that  if  they  were  to 
support  any  Clintonian  it  would  be  Clinton  himself. 
As  for  Judge  Yates,  he  gave  the  scheme  no  countenance, 
but  some  days  before  the  meeting  of  the  State  con- 
vention declared  that  in  no  circumstances  would  he 
accept  a  nomination  for  Governor. 

At  that,  Van  Buren  turned  to  Peter  B.  Porter.  Him 
we  have  already  heard  of  as  a  man  of  splendid  parts, 
one  of  the  few  real  heroes  of  our  army  in  the  War 
of  1812,  and  Secretary  of  State  of  New  York.  There 
could  scarcely  have  been  a  worthier  candidate  for  Gov- 
ernor than  he.  Yet  there  was  a  certain  incongruity  in 


JOHN  TAYLER 

John  Tayler,  6th  governor  (1817)  ;  born  in  New  York  City, 
July  4,  1742;  in  1760  removed  to  Lake  George,  subsequently 
to  Oswego;  member  of  council  between  whites  and  Indians; 
member  of  provincial  congress  in  1776-1777  and  of  council  of 
safety,  1777;  member  of  assembly  from  Albany  at  1st,  2nd,  4th, 
9th  and  10th  sessions,  1777-1787;  canal  commissioner,  1792; 
county  judge,  1797;  regent,  1802;  state  senator,  1802,  1804-13; 
capitol  commissioner,  1804;  lieutenant  governor,  1811,  1813-17; 
vice  chancellor,  1814;  acting  governor,  February  24-July  1,  1817 
in  place  of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  elected  vice-president; 
chancellor,  1817;  at  his  table  Hamilton  made  comments  which 
provoked  challenge  from  Burr;  died  at  Albany,  N.  Y.,  April 
19,  1829. 


1817]  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  401 

his  being  put  forward  as  the  opponent  of  Clinton  by 
a  leader  who  relied  for  support  chiefly  upon  Tam- 
many Hall,  for  Porter  was  as  ardent  an  advocate  of  the 
canal  as  Clinton  himself,  and  he  refused  to  have  any 
fellowship  with  Tammany  Hall  or  even  to  recognize 
its  support  of  himself.  However,  General  Porter  was 
ambitious  and  assented  to  the  presentation  of  his  name 
in  the  convention.  He  was  overwhelmingly  defeated, 
so  badly  that  it  appeared  that  he  would  have  been 
defeated  if  the  nomination  had  been  left  solely  to  the 
Legislature.  The  convention  was  composed  of  93 
members  of  the  Legislature  and  32  delegates  from  the 
counties  which  had  no  Democratic  representation  in 
the  Legislature.  Of  the  members  of  the  Legislature 
60  voted  for  Clinton  and  33  for  Porter;  and  of  the  dele- 
gates 25  for  Clinton  and  7  for  Porter. 

DeWitt  Clinton  was  thus  the  regular  candidate 
of  the  Democratic  party,  and  was  frankly  accepted 
as  such  by  Van  Buren  and  all  others  excepting  Tam- 
many Hall  and  a  few  personal  enemies  of  Clinton, 
who  controlled  few  if  any  votes  but  their  own  He  was 
also  the  candidate,  in  effect,  of  the  Federalists,  who 
nominated  no  candidate  of  their  own  and  manyof  whom, 
led  by  Jonas  Platt,  the  former  candidate  for  Gov- 
ernor and  at  this  time  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court; 
William  W.  Van  Ness,  also  a  Supreme  Court  Justice 
and  one  of  the  most  brilliant  men  in  the  State;  and 
Jacob  Van  Rensselaer,  a  consummate  political  leader 
and  former  Secretary  of  State,  openly  spoke  and  dili- 
gently worked  in  Clinton's  behalf.  This  support  was 


402  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

given  to  Clinton  by  the  Federalists  largely  because  they 
were  as  a  party  strongly  in  favor  of  the  canals  and  a 
general  system  of  State  aid  for  public  works. 

Tammany  Hall,  however,  was  implacable  in  its  hos- 
tility to  Clinton  and  to  the  canal.  Whether  it  was 
against  him  because  of  his  canal  scheme,  or  against 
the  canal  scheme  because  it  was  his,  is  not  altogether 
clear.  Certain  it  is  that  it  went  to  the  extreme  of  vio- 
lent ridicule  and  denunciation  of  both,  and  when  he 
won  the  nomination  it  openly  bolted  the  result  of  the 
convention  and  announced  its  purpose  to  support 
General  Porter.  Of  course  General  Porter  did  not 
sanction  its  support  of  him,  and  declined  to  consider 
himself  a  candidate,  though  he  was  powerless  to  pre- 
vent Tammany  from  distributing  in  every  part  of  the 
State  its  ballots  with  his  name  printed  upon  them.  In 
this  campaign  the  Tammany  men  who  had  thus  bolted 
the  regular  party  wore  bucks'  tails  as  badges  on  their 
hats,  and  thus  became  historically  known  as  the  "Buck- 
tails"  or  Bucktail  party.  The  result  of  the  election  was 
of  course  a  foregone  conclusion,  and  was  more  over- 
whelming than  that  of  any  other  in  the  history  of  the 
State.  DeWitt  Clinton  received  43,3 10  votes,  of  Demo- 
crats and  Federalists  alike.  Porter  received  1,479 
votes,  of  the  "Bucktails"  of  Tammany  Hall.  Mr. 
Tayler  was  by  a  similar  vote  reflected  Lieutenant- 
Governor.  The  Democrats  secured  all  the  Senators 
who  were  chosen  that  year,  and  a  strong  majority  in 
the  Assembly. 

This  was  a  victory  at  the  polls  unique  in  New  York 
history.  Unsurpassed,  if  not  unrivalled,  also  was 


1817]  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  403 

Clinton's  moral  victory.  Only  a  short  time  before  he 
had  been  beaten,  humiliated,  expelled  from  office,  and 
all  but  ruined  in  his  personal  estate,  as  few  men  have 
ever  been.  Now  he  was  at  a  stroke  placed  in  the  high- 
est office  in  the  State,  and  not  as  the  result  of  politi- 
cal intriguing  but  by  a  practically  non-partisan  upris- 
ing of  the  people  because  of  their  recognition  of  the 
superlative  value  to  them  of  a  project  with  which  he 
had  identified  himself  and  upon  the  success  of  which 
he  had  staked  his  political  all.  We  have  said  that  the 
splendid  climax  of  Tompkins's  career  was  attained  at 
the  moment  of  his  resignation  of  the  Governorship. 
It  might  with  similar  propriety  be  said  that  DeWitt 
Clinton  attained  the  summit  of  his  career  upon  his 
election  to  the  Governorship,  or  perhaps  at  his  inau- 
guration as  Governor  on  July  1,  1817,  and  his  begin- 
ning actual  construction  work  on  the  Erie  canal  three 
days  later.  There  were  many  notable  passages  in  his 
record  thereafter,  but  there  were  also  many  regrettable 
blunders,  so  that  he  never  again  stood  quite  where  he 
did  in  those  triumphant  days  when  the  people  of  the 
State  recalled  him  from  retirement  and  made  him  their 
Chief  Executive  with  a  mandate  from  them  to  build 
the  canals  which  he  had  planned. 

Beyond  doubt  he  showed  himself  a  great  construc- 
tive statesman,  one  of  the  ablest  that  ever  filled  the 
Governorship  of  the  State.  Yet  he  was  never  able 
entirely  to  lose  the  politician  in  the  statesman,  or  to 
subordinate  his  own  personal  feelings  to  his  public 
duties.  It  should  have  been  obvious  to  him,  as  it  was 
to  others,  that  his  enormous  majority  over  General 


404  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Porter  was  due  to  the  fact  that  those  who  were  opposed 
to  him  did  not  vote  at  all.  That  is  demonstrated  by 
the  figures.  He  had  43,310  and  Porter  1,479  votes, 
a  total  of  44,789.  But  those  were  scarcely  half  of 
the  voters  of  the  State.  In  the  preceding  election  of 
1815  Tompkins  had  received  45,412  and  King  38,647 
votes,  a  total  of  84,059.  The  fall  from  84,059  to 
44,789,  though  there  had  been  a  natural  increase  in  the 
number  of  qualified  voters  in  the  State,  shows  how 
many  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  declined  to  vote 
for  Clinton,  though  there  was  nobody  else  to  vote  for. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Clinton,  despite  his  enormous 
majority,  actually  got  fewer  votes  than  Tompkins  had 
got  in  1815.  It  is  probable  that  the  bulk  of  his  sup- 
port came  from  Federalists.  The  majority  of  Demo- 
crats throughout  the  State  would  not  vote  for  him,  but 
they  would  not  follow  the  example  of  Tammany  in 
bolting  the  regular  party  nomination  and  voting  for 
Porter,  so  they  did  not  vote  at  all. 

A  more  politic  politician,  or  one  less  self-willed, 
would  have  recognized  this  fact  and  its  significance, 
and  would  have  done  what  he  could  to  conciliate  his 
own  party  and  to  win  its  support.  Not  so  Clinton. 
He  made  no  overtures  whatever  to  Van  Buren  and  his 
followers,  not  even  to  the  latter  when  some  of  them 
parted  company  with  Van  Buren  and  showed  a  readi- 
ness to  become  followers  of  Clinton.  He  was  of  course 
loyal  to  and  appreciative  of  his  old  friends.  But  he 
in  a  notable  manner  cultivated  intimacy  and  confidence 
with  those  Federalist  leaders  who  had  favored  his 
election,  such  as  Justices  Van  Ness  and  Platt,  and 


1817]  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  405 

Thomas  J.  Oakley.  This  course  he  justified  by  say- 
ing that  party  lines  had  become  so  broken  and  prin- 
ciples so  undefined  and  mixed  that  there  was  little 
difference  between  them,  and  that  there  would  in  the 
near  future  inevitably  be  a  general  reorganization  and 
realignment  of  both  parties.  In  that  he  was  quite  cor- 
rect, as  subsequent  events  showed;  but  it  was  poor 
politics  for  him  so  openly  to  act  upon  that  principle. 
Soon  after  his  inauguration  he  called  the  Council  of 
Appointment  together,  and  there  was  general  expecta- 
tion that  sweeping  changes  would  be  made.  In  fact 
there  were  very  few,  and  there  were  only  two  that 
were  purely  political  in  character.  The  Council  late 
in  August  removed  John  L.  Broome  and  appointed 
Benjamin  Ferris  as  County  Clerk  in  New  York,  and 
removed  Robert  McComb,  son  of  the  notorious  land 
speculator,  Alexander  McComb,  and  appointed  John 
W.  Wyman  as  Clerk  of  the  Circuit.  The  men  removed 
were  both  active  members  of  Tammany  Hall  and  had 
made  themselves  conspicuous  in  the  bolt  against  Clin- 
ton's nomination.  Many  requests,  appeals,  and  demands 
were  made  upon  him  for  the  removal  of  other  officials 
and  the  appointment  of  his  own  friends  in  their  places, 
but  he  resolutely  refused,  on  the  ground  that  the 
Council  would  not  countenance  such  changes.  It  is 
probable  that  he  himself  deemed  it  politic,  to  make  as 
few  changes  as  possible.  Indeed,  he  was  becoming 
convinced  of  the  evil  of  such  prostitution  of  the  public 
service  as  had  so  greatly  prevailed,  and  was  getting 
ready  to  recommend  abolition  of  the  whole  Council 


406  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1817 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

of  Appointment  system.  His  course,  however,  did  not 
profit  him.  The  office-holders  showed  him  little  grati- 
tude for  permitting  them  to  retain  their  places,  while 
the  office-seekers  were  resentful  at  his  refusal  to  give 
them  the  places  they  coveted. 

One  noteworthy  act  of  the  early  part  of  his  adminis- 
tration was  the  establishment  of  the  custom  of  observ- 
ing a  yearly  Thanksgiving  day.  This  had  been 
attempted  by  John  Jay  in  1795,  and  indeed  one 
Thanksgiving  day  was  then  observed.  But  it  met 
with  so  widespread  disapproval  that  Governor  Jay  did 
not  repeat  the  experiment.  People  seemed  to  think 
that  it  contained  some  covert  attempt  to  impose  an 
official  state  church  upon  them.  But  when,  in  1817, 
Clinton  designated  the  second  Thursday  of  November 
as  a  day  of  public  thanksgiving,  there  was  general 
approval,  so  that  the  practice  was  unhesitatingly  fol- 
lowed in  every  succeeding  year. 

The  beginning  of  the  Erie  canal  was,  however,  the 
supreme  achievement  of  the  first  months  of  his  adminis- 
tration. That  gigantic  work  was  undertaken  on  the 
Fourth  of  July,  1817,  and  before  the  end  of  summer 
Clinton  was  able  to  write  to  a  friend  that  it  was  pro 
ceeding  finely.  Ten  miles  of  it  would  be  finished  that 
season,  and  within  the  estimates  of  cost  and  time.  This 
auspicious  result  was  attained  by  the  contractors'  use 
of  machinery  which,  primitive  as  it  was  and  con- 
temptible as  it  would  seem  now,  after  a  hundred  years, 
then  seemed  as  wonderful  as  the  gigantic  steam  shovels 
in  the  Culebra  Cut  appeared  to  the  astonished  specta- 


1817]  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  CLINTON  407 

tors  of  work  at  Panama.  He  had  inherited  the  canal 
scheme  from  his  uncle,  he  had  made  it  the  chief  hobby 
of  his  life,  he  had  won  the  Governorship  on  it  as  an 
issue,  and  now  he  was  "making  good." 


CHAPTER  XX 
DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR 

THE  Forty-first  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New 
York  assembled  at  Albany  on  January  27,  1818. 
Having  been  elected  simultaneously  with  DeWitt 
Clinton,  the  Assembly  naturally  contained  a  strong 
majority  of  his  political  supporters.  As  at  the  polls, 
this  majority  was  composed  partly  of  Clintonian  Demo- 
crats and  partly  of  Federalists.  So  overwhelming  was 
it  that  no  opposition  to  it  was  attempted  in  the  organi- 
zation of  the  house,  and  accordingly  David  Woods, 
of  Washington  county,  an  enthusiastic  advocate  of  the 
canals,  was  elected  Speaker  by  ninety-seven  votes.  No 
other  candidate  was  named,  and  the  opponents  of 
Woods  contented  themselves  with  not  voting  at  all. 

The  Governor's  address  was  one  of  the  longest,  most 
elaborate,  and  most  statesmanlike  that  had  ever  been 
presented  to  the  Legislature.  Indeed,  in  the  scope  of 
its  survey  of  State  interests  it  may  well  be  said  to  havr 
surpassed  them  all.  Other  Governors  had  discussed 
two,  three,  or  four  salient  points,  and  passed  all  others 
over  with  light  mention  or  none  at  all.  Clinton  con- 
sidered in  detail  practically  every  important  issue  thn 
was  before  the  State,  and  brought  into  prominence  sev- 
eral the  importance  of  which  hadt  not  been  generally 
recognized.  Naturally  he  gave  prominence  to  canals 
and  river  improvement,  but  he  paid  comparable  atten- 
tion to  roads,  agriculture,  common  schools,  colleges 

408 


1818]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  +09 

and  professional  schools,  public  lands,  prison  reform, 
pauperism,  the  militia,  State  finances,  banking  and  cur- 
rency, and  relations  with  the  Indian  tribes.  From  first 
to  last  it  was  free  from  personalities  and  factional 
politics,  and  was  instinct  with  constructive  statesman- 
ship of  an  elevated  and  progressive  type. 

Despite  the  intense  political  antagonisms  which  soon 
arose,  moreover,  Clinton's  address  was  effective  in 
securing  the  enactment  of  much  valuable  legislation. 
During  that  session  the  Legislature  provided  for  a  four 
years'  course  of  study  for  the  degree  of  doctor  of 
medicine.  A  joint  committee  of  the  two  houses 
presented  a  most  interesting  and  profitable  report  on 
the  agricultural  interests  of  the  State,  and  recommended 
the  creation  of  a  Department  of  Agriculture,  or  Board 
of  Agriculture,  as  a  part  of  the  State-  government, 
supplemented  by  a  State  Agricultural  Society  and 
subordinate  agricultural  society  in  each  county.  A 
State  agricultural  fund  was  to  be  provided  by  taking 
for  the  purpose  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  license  fees  of 
taverns,  which  fees  were  to  be  considerably  increased 
for  the  purpose,  and  this  fund  was  to  be  apportioned 
among  the  county  societies  to  provide  lectures,  prizes 
at  agricultural  exhibitions,  etc.  During  the  session  the 
new  State  Capitol  was  completed  at  a  cost  of  $110,685, 
of  which  sum  the  city  of  Albany  paid  $34,200,  and 
Albany  county  $3,000.  The  Legislature  adjourned  on 
April  21. 

Although  DeWitt  Clinton  was  at  this  time  at  the 
height  of  his  power  and  political  prosperity,  he  was 
confronted  with  the  most  formidable  opposition  he  had 


410  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1818 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

ever  known.  This  opposition  was  led  by  the  New 
York  faction  formerly  known  as  Martling's  Men  and 
later  as  the  Tammany  Society,  or  Tammany  Hall. 
All  the  members  of  the  Assembly  from  New  York 
county  belonged  to  that  faction,  and  with  the  single 
exception  of  Cadwallader  Golden  they  were  all 
intensely  hostile  to  Clinton.  In  view  of  the  fact  that 
the  Erie  canal  became  one  of  the  chief  contributors  to 
the  growth,  the  wealth,  and  the  general  greatness  of 
New  York  City,  there  is  a  bitter  irony  in  the  recollec- 
tion that  these  New  York  City  representatives  were 
resolutely  opposed  to  that  enterprise,  and  indeed  that 
their  hostility  to  Clinton  was  chiefly  based  upon  his 
advocacy  of  that  and  other  great  plans  of  internal 
improvement  for  the  State. 

But  the  opposition  to  Clinton  was  not  confined  to 
New  York  City.  Other  Democrats,  throughout  the 
State,  allied  themselves  with  the  Tammany  contingent. 
They  were  not  members  of  the  Tammany  Society,  and 
did  not  wish  to  be  called  by  its  name.  But  they 
adopted  the  name  of  a  piece  of  the  Tammany  insignia. 
Members  of  that  order  on  some  occasions  wore  the  short 
tails  of  buck  deer  in  their  hats,  in  lieu  of  cockades,  and 
these,  as  already  stated,  were  used  as  a  campaign  badge 
in  1817;  wherefore  the  anti-Clinton  faction  became 
known  as  the  Bucktail  party.  The  name  was  given  to  it 
by  the  Clintonians  in  derision,  but  it  was  soon  accepted 
and  came  into  general  use  by  both  friends  and  foes  of 
Tammany.  Although,  as  already  stated,  the  Buckfails  in 
the  Assembly  were  so  few  that  they  made  no  contest 
over  the  Speakership,  they  comprised  some  men  of 


1818]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  411 

commanding  ability,  including  Ogden  Edwards,  Clark- 
son  Crolius,  and  Erastus  Root.  In  the  Senate  the 
faction  was  much  stronger  in  numbers.  It  comprised 
thirteen  of  the  twenty-seven  members  of  that  house, 
led  by  Martin  Van  Buren,  while  there  were  only  seven 
who  could  be  counted  upon  to  support  the  Governor. 
Seven  other  Democrats  were  neutral,  and  the  remain- 
ing five  Senators,  led  by  Abraham  Van  Vechten,  were 
Federalists. 

Great  interest  centered,  as  usual,  in  the  election  of 
the  Council  of  Appointment.  As  the  Assembly  had  a 
strong  Clintonian  majority,  its  inclination  was  to 
choose  a  Council  composed  of  the  Governor's  friends. 
This,  however,  was  not  possible,  for  the  reason  that 
it  was  necessary  to  select  one  Senator  from  each  of  the 
four  districts,  and  there  was  not  a  Clintonian  Senator  in 
each  of  them.  Van  Buren,  one  of  the  most  adroit  of 
wirepullers  and  conspirators,  wished  to  have  a  Council 
chosen  which  should  be  nominally  favorable  to  Clin- 
ton, so  that  he  would  be  popularly  held  responsible  for 
its  acts,  and  yet  which  should  in  fact  be  by  no  means 
subservient  to  him.  In  this  design  the  "Fox  of  Kinder- 
hook,"  as  Van  Buren  began  to  be  known,  was  success- 
ful. The  practice  was  for  the  Assembly  to  elect  Sena- 
tors to  the  Council  who  had  been  selected  by  caucuses 
of  the  Assemblymen  from  their  respective  districts. 
From  the  Southern  district  the  Tammany  men,  or 
Bucktails,  unhesitatingly  designated  a  bitter  anti- 
Clintonian  in  the  person  of  Peter  R.  Livingston.  In 
the  Eastern  district  there  was  only  one  Senator  who 
professed  to  be  friendly  to  Clinton.  That  was  Henry 


412  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1818 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Yates,  who  was  duly  elected.  But  his  brother,  Judge 
Yates,  was  already  chosen  as  the  anti-Clintonian  can- 
didate for  the  Governorship  at  the  next  election,  and 
he  accordingly  was  drawn  away  from  support  of  the 
Governor.  In  the  Western  district  there  were  two 
Clintonian  Senators  who  were  candidates  for  the  Coun- 
cil and  who  persisted  in  their  rivalry,  with  the  result 
that  neither  won,  but  Henry  Seymour,  an  opponent 
of  Clinton  and  a  close  friend  of  Van  Buren,  was 
chosen.  In  the  Middle  district  the  Senator  chosen 
was  Dr.  Jabez  D.  Hammond,  the  historian,  a  supporter 
of  Clinton.  In  the  last  analysis,  therefore,  the  Council 
stood  two  resolutely  against  Clinton,  one  for  him,  and 
one  nominally  for  him  but  in  fact  increasingly  hostile 
to  him. 

One  of  the  first  appointments  made  by  the  Council 
was  that  of  Cadwallader  D.  Colden  to  be  Mayor  of 
New  York.  Although  he  was  a  Bucktail  he  was 
friendly  to  Clinton.  He  was  not  Clinton's  first  choice 
for  the  place,  but  was  accepted  by  him  when  Dr.  Ham- 
mond informed  him  that  it  would  be  impossible  to 
elect  Sylvanus  Miller,  whom  the  Governor  preferred. 
Peter  C.  Van  Wyck  and  other  Clintonians  were  restored 
to  the  places  which  they  had  formerly  held  but  from 
which  they  had  been  removed  by  a  preceding  Council. 
Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman,  long  a  leading  Federalist  but 
now  a  warm  supporter  of  Clinton,  sought  appointment 
as  Recorder  of  New  York,  in  place  of  Richard  Riker, 
but  to  this  Mr.  Yates  would  not  assent,  and  it  was  not 
done.  A  demand  of  Clintonians  for  the  removal  of 
William  L.  Marcy  from  the  office  of  Recorder  of  Troy 


1818]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  413 

was  at  first  refused  by  Dr.  Hammond,  but  after  the 
April  election,  at  which  Mr.  Marcy  led  the  Bucktails 
in  opposing  the  Clintonian  candidates,  the  demand  \vrt 
renewed,  and  the  removal  was  made  by  the  votes 
Dr.  Hammond,  Mr.  Yates,  and  the  Governor.    In  spite 
of  the  strong  resistance  of  Dr.  Hammond  and  the  Gov- 
ernor, the  other  three  members  of  the  Council  removed 
Dr.  Cooper  from  the  office  of  Secretary  of  State  and 
appointed  John  Van  Ness  Yates  in  his  place. 

The  dissatisfaction,  not  to  say  disgust,  with  which 
the  conduct  of  the  Council  of  Appointment  was 
regarded  inclined  an  increasing  number  of  thought! ul 
citizens  to  seek  some  means  of  abating  an  abuse  which 
day  by  day  was  becoming  more  detrimental  to  good 
government.  The  conviction  became  widespread  that 
the  scheme  of  the  Council,  however  well  meant  and 
however  good  it  might  be  in  ideal  conditions,  was  in 
existing  conditions  mistaken  and  incompatible  with 
good  government,  and  that  its  abolition  was  demanded 
for  the  welfare  of  the  State.  A  motion  to  that  effect  was 
made  during  the  legislative  session  of  1818  by  Ogden 
Edwards,  an  Assemblyman  from  New  York — a  son  of 
Pierpont  Edwards  and  afterward  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court.  He  was  a  leader  of  the  Bucktails  and 
an  opponent  of  Clinton.  He  introduced  a  bill  calling 
for  a  Constitutional  convention,  not  for  a  general 
revision  of  the  Constitution  but  solely  for  considering 
and  revising  such  parts  of  that  instrument  as  related 
to  the  appointment  of  officers.  The  fate  of  this  meas- 
ure obviously  depended  upon  the  Governor,  whos^ 
wishes  were  law  to  a  majority  of  the  Assembly,  and 


414  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1818 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

many  of  his  best  friends  strongly  advised  him  to  give 
the  word  for  its  adoption.  They  pointed  out  to  him 
the  increasing  evils  of  the  Council  system,  which  indeed 
nobody  realized  better  than  himself,  and  the  certainty 
of  a  change  in  the  method  of  appointment  before  much 
more  time  should  pass,  and  they  urged  upon  him  both 
the  public  policy  and  the  political  expediency  of  his 
identifying  himself  with  the  reform.  But  Clinton 
would  not  listen  to  them.  The  bill  had  been  intro- 
duced by  a  Bucktail,  and  that  was  enough  to  damn  it 
in  his  sight.  So  his  followers  in  the  Assembly  voted 
against  it  and  it  was  defeated. 

In  the  April  elections  of  1818  the  Clintonians  were 
generally  successful  and  the  Governor  retained  a 
strong  majority  of  the  Assembly.  In  New  York  City, 
however,  the  Bucktails  were  triumphant  by  a  majority 
of  more  than  a  thousand,  a  large  majority  for  those 
days.  In  the  Senate,  too,  Clinton  made  marked  gains. 
In  the  State  as  a  whole  the  Clintonian  votes  outnum- 
bered the  Bucktail  by  many  thousands.  Nevertheless 
the  Bucktails,  under  the  adroit  and  not  over-scrupulous 
management  of  Van  Buren,  contrived  to  create  the 
widespread  impression  that  they  were  in  the  majority 
of  the  Democratic  party,  and  that  Governor  Clinton 
and  his  followers  were  merely  a  dissenting  and  dis- 
loyal minority,  and  this  impression  was  greatly  strength- 
ened, if  not  justified,  by  the  course  of  the  Clintonians 
in  the  organization  of  the  next  Legislature,  in  Janu- 
ary, 1819.  That  body  met  on  January  5,  an  act  in 
1818  having  changed  the  date  of  meeting  from  the  third 


1819]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  415 

to  the  first  Tuesday  of  January,  and  the  Assembly  was 
immediately  involved  in  an  embittered  contest  over  the 
election  of  a  Speaker. 

The  Governor  and  his  followers,  though  command- 
ing a  majority  of  the  Assembly,  appear  to  have  fixed 
upon  no  candidate  for  that  place  until  the  very  last 
moment  There  had  been  a  general  expectation  that 
John  Van  Ness  Yates,  who  had  been  elected  from 
Albany,  and  who  was  not  strongly  attached  to  either 
faction  of  the  party,  would  be  elected  without  serious 
opposition.  But  the  very  day  before  the  Legislature 
was  to  meet  Clinton  and  his  chief  adviser,  Ambrose 
Spencer,  decided  that  Yates  would  not  do.  He  could 
not  be  depended  upon  to  stand  with  them  against  the 
Bucktails.  So  they  dictated  the  election  of  General 
Obadiah  German,  who  had  just  been  reflected  to  the 
Assembly  after  an  interval  of  many  years.  There  is 
reason  to  believe  that  General  German  himself  opposed, 
or  at  least  disapproved,  his  candidacy.  He  was  unpopu- 
lar. He  had  as  a  Senator  in  Congress  opposed  the 
War  of  1812  and  had  voted  against  some  of  the  meas- 
ures for  its  prosecution.  He  had  signed  the  address 
opposing  the  election  of  Tompkins  in  1813.  He  had, 
finally,  been  elected  to  the  Assembly  in  April,  1818, 
by  Federalist  votes,  in  opposition  to  the  regular  Demo- 
cratic candidate.  A  worse  choice  for  the  Speakership, 
from  the  point  of  view  of  political  expediency,  could 
scarcely  have  been  found. 

Clinton  and  Spencer,  with  amazing  fatuity,  made  no 
effort  to  secure  support  for  German  in  advance  of  the 
meeting  of  the  caucus,  on  the  evening  of  January  4.  At 


416  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

that  meeting  seventy-five  members  were  present. 
These  included  every  Bucktail  member,  while  a  dozen 
or  more  Clintonians  had  not  yet  arrived  at  Albany. 
The  Clintonian  leaders  had  made  no  effort  to  secure  a 
full  attendance,  apparently  because  they  did  not  expect 
a  contest.  They  had  not  been  informed  of  Clinton's 
plan  to  spring  General  German  upon  them,  but  sup- 
posed that  Yates  would  be  the  unopposed  candidate. 
Meantime  the  Bucktails  had  been  secretly  but  most 
efficiently  preparing  for  the  contest.  They  made  sure 
that  every  one  of  their  men  was  on  hand,  and  they 
secretly  pledged  them  all  in  advance  to  the  support  of 
a  candidate  whom  Van  Buren  had  selected.  This  was 
William  Thompson,  who  had  served  in  the  Assembly 
for  several  years  from  Seneca  county — a  young  lawyer 
of  good  repute  and  considerable  ability,  and  of  much 
personal  magnetism.  His  candidacy  was  not  made 
known  until  the  assembling  of  the  caucus. 

The  Clintonians  were  thus  doubly  surprised,  first  at 
having  the  unaccaptable  candidacy  of  General  German 
forced  upon  them  by  Clinton,  and  second  at  being  con- 
fronted with  the  formidable  candidacy  of  Mr.  Thomp- 
son. There  was  no  time  to  remonstrate  or  argue  with 
the  Governor,  and  of  course  none  to  secure  the  atten- 
dance of  their  absent  collegues.  The  result  was  that 
the  Bucktails  controlled  the  caucus,  and  Mr.  Thomp- 
son was  nominated  by  it  for  Speaker,  by  forty-two  votes 
to  thirty-three  for  General  German.  Had  the  absent 
Clintonians  been  present,  German  would  have  won. 

It  was  of  course  morally  incumbent  upon  the  Clin- 
tonians to  abide  by  the  result  of  the  caucus,  and  they 


DEWITT  CLINTON 

Dewitt  Clinton,  7th  and  9th  governor  (1817-22),  (1824-28); 
born  in  Little  Britain,  Orange  county,  March  2,  1769;  lawyer; 
private  secretary  to  George  Clinton,  his  uncle,  1797;  member 
state  legislature  1798-1802,  1806-1811;  United  States  senator 
1802;  mayor  of  New  York  city  1803-1807,  1808-1810,  1811-1815; 
candidate  for  president  against  James  Madison,  1812;  governor. 
1817-22;  father  of  the  Erie  canal;  reflected  governor,  1824; 
opened  canal,  October  26,  1826;  died  in  office  February  11,  1828. 


1819}  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  417 

probably  would  have  done  so  had  they  not  been  com- 
manded by  Clinton  and  Spencer  to  do  otherwise.  Dur- 
ing the  night  more  Clintonian  Assemblymen  arrived, 
and  orders  were  issued  that  they  should  disregard  the 
caucus  and  vote  for  General  German.  Accordingly 
that  course  was  pursued  at  the  assembling  of  the  house 
on  January  5.  The  Clintonians  voted  for  German,  the 
Bucktails  for  Thompson,  and  the  Federalists  for  Will- 
iam A.  Duer,  of  Albany.  None  of  the  three  received  a 
majority,  which  was  necessary  for  election,  though 
because  of  the  arrival  of  the  absentee  Clintonians  more 
votes  were  cast  for  German  than  for  Thompson.  After 
four  ineffectual  ballots  the  Assembly  adjourned  to  the 
next  day.  The  fifth  ballot,  on  January  6,  showed  55 
votes  for  German,  38  for  Thompson,  and  20  for  Duer. 
Then  Erastus  Root  offered  a  resolution  that  further 
balloting  be  dispensed  with  and  that  Mr.  Thompson  be 
appointed  Speaker.  This  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of 
only  41  ayes  to  72  nays.  A  similar  motion  followed 
in  behalf  of  Mr.  Duer,  and  was  lost  by  3 1  to  82.  Again 
such  a  motion  was  made,  in  behalf  of  General  German, 
and  was  adopted,  by  the  vote  of  67  to  48.  Nominally 
it  was  a  victory  for  Clinton.  In  fact,  it  was  far  worse 
than  a  defeat.  His  course  in  causing  his  followers  to 
repudiate  the  result  of  the  regular  party  caucus  con- 
firmed the  charges  of  Van  Buren  and  the  Bucktails  that 
he  was  not  a  loyal  Democrat,  and  his  imposition  of  so 
unpopular  a  man  as  General  German  upon  the 
Assembly  as  Speaker  alienated  many  of  his  former  sup- 
porters and  caused  many  more  to  question  the  wisdom 
of  his  leadership. 


418  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

At  the  opening  of  the  Forty-second  Legislature,  in 
1819,  Governor  Clinton  delivered  another  long, 
scholarly  address,  instinct  throughout  with  fine  con- 
structive statesmanship  and  presenting  an  extraor- 
dinary contrast  to  the  wretched  factional  politics  in 
which  he  had  just  been  engaged.  He  discussed  the 
canal  question  at  great  length,  and  also  devoted  much 
attention  to  agriculture,  education,  hospitals  and 
asylums,  the  militia,  the  protection  of  negroes  and 
Indians  in  their  civil  rights,  prison  reform,  and  bank- 
ing and  currency.  His  recommendations  concerning 
prison  reform  were  not  altogether  in  the  direction  of 
leniency  to  evil-doers,  and  it  is  interesting  to  recall  that 
a  part  of  the  response  of  the  Legislature  was  to  enact  a 
measure  providing  for  the  flogging  of  criminals  with 
not  more  than  thirty-nine  strokes  of  the  lash,  for  solitary 
confinement  on  a  diet  of  bread  and  water,  and  for  plac- 
ing prisoners  in  stocks. 

From  a  political  point  of  view  the  chief  business  of 
this  session  of  the  Legislature  was  the  election  of  a 
United  States  Senator  to  succeed  Rufus  King,  whose 
term  was  to  expire  in  March.  Governor  Clinton 
was  strongly  antagonistic  to  Mr.  King  and  was  opposed 
to  his  reelection;  facts  which  were  reflected  in  the 
course  of  John  A.  King,  the  son  of  Senator  King,  who 
as  a  member  of  the  Assembly  voted  persistently  against 
General  German  for  Speaker.  This  deprived  Clinton 
of  much  of  the  Federalist  support  which  he  had  been 
receiving,  and  which  otherwise  he  might  have  counted 
upon  in  any  case  against  the  Bucktails.  But  Van  Buren 
and  his  aids  industriously  put  forward  the  suggestion, 


1819]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  419 

indeed  the  charge,  that  Clinton  was  in  fact  strongly  in 
favor  of  Mr.  King,  and  that  his  apparent  opposition  to 
him  was  merely  assumed  for  the  purpose  of  deceiving 
good  Democrats.  This  falsehood,  ingeniously  and 
plausibly  propagated,  was  widely  believed,  and 
deprived  the  Governor  of  much  Democratic  support. 
In  these  circumstances  the  Federalists  resolved  to  vote 
for  the  reelection  of  Senator  King.  The  Clintonians 
selected  as  their  candidate  John  C.  Spencer,  son  of 
Ambrose  Spencer,  a  young  man  of  splendid  ability, 
who  in  a  single  term  in  Congress  had  placed  himself 
among  the  national  leaders,  and  who  was  destined  to 
become  a  cabinet  minister  and  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court.  The  Bucktails  fixed  upon  Samuel 
Young,  a  competent  lawyer  and  one  of  the  most  brilliant 
orators  of  his  time,  remembered  as  one  of  the  few  who 
ever  held  their  own  in  controversy  with  the  great 
Chancellor,  James  Kent.  Seldom  had  three  more 
noteworthy  men  been  put  forward  at  the  same  time  for 
a  United  States  Senatorship. 

The  joint  session  for  election  of  Senator  was  to  occur 
on  February  2.  In  advance  of  it  a  caucus  of  the  Demo- 
cratic members  was  held,  including,  for  the  last  time, 
both  Clintonians  and  Bucktails.  Van  Buren  meant  it, 
in  advance,  to  be  the  last.  He  had  no  thought  of  its 
performing  the  duty  of  a  caucus  in  the  selection  of  a 
candidate,  knowing  full  well  that  the  Clintonians  would 
have  a  majority.  He  intended  instead  that  it  should 
foment  an  open  breach  between  the  two  factions,  and 
thus,  as  he  hoped,  "read  Clinton  out  of  the  party."  In 
that  he  succeeded.  The  moment  the  caucus  was 


420  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

opened  Bucktail  after  Bucktail  took  the  floor  with  bit- 
ter aspersions  upon  Governor  Clinton,  and  indirectly 
upon  Obadiah  German,  whom  Clinton  had  forced  upon 
the  Assembly  as  Speaker.  These  attacks  had  their 
intended  effect  in  provoking  an  angry  reply  from  Ger- 
man, who  was  blunt  and  forceful  but  not  at  all  a  tactful 
orator.  To  this,  in  accordance  with  design,  Peter  R. 
Livingston,  a  Bucktail  leader,  made  still  more  acri- 
monious retort,  which  provoked  another  outburst  from 
German,  and  the  caucus  was  on  the  point  of  becoming 
a  free-for-all  fight  when,  on  the  motion  of  another 
Bucktail,  John  T.  Irving,  it  adjourned.  Thus  no  nom- 
ination was  made,  although  the  Clintonians  were  in  the 
majority  and  could  have  nominated  whom  they  pleased 
had  they  only  kept  their  heads  and  not  been  led  into  the 
Bucktail  trap  of  getting  into  a  wrangle  and  then 
adjourning. 

That  episode  completed  the  breach  between  the  two 
factions,  and  they  never  again  united  in  a  caucus.  The 
Clintonians  held  another  caucus  a  little  later,  and  nom- 
inated John  C.  Spencer.  But  Van  Buren  and  his  fol- 
lowers insisted  that  as  the  Clintonians  had  formerly 
bolted  the  Speakership  caucus,  and  had  now  adjourned 
a  caucus  in  which  they  had  a  majority  without  making 
a  nomination,  only  to  hold  a  factional  caucus  later,  they 
must  be  regarded  as  having  withdrawn  themselves  from 
the  Democratic  party  and  as  being  no  longer  entitled 
to  recognition  as  members  of  it. 

Another  result  of  the  episode  was  that  New  York  was 
for  a  time  permitted  to  have  only  one  Senator  at  Wash- 
ington. The  Legislature  met  in  joint  session  on  Febru- 


1819]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  421 

ary  2,  1919,  for  the  election  of  a  Senator.  The  Clin- 
tonians  voted  for  John  C.  Spencer,  and  gave  him  64 
votes.  The  Bucktails  supported  Samuel  Young  with 
57  votes.  The  Federalists  gave  Rufus  King,  for  reelec- 
tion, 34  votes.  So  intense  was  factional  feeling  that  it 
was  generally  recognized  that  there  was  no  hope  of  a 
compromise,  and  in  consequence  the  joint  session 
adjourned  without  making  an  election  and  did  not  reas- 
semble. The  election  of  a  Senator  was  thus  deferred 
until  the  next  Legislature  should  meet  in  1820.  This 
result  was  charged  by  Senator  King  and  his  friends 
against  Governor  Clinton,  and  greatly  intensified  the 
aversion  which  the  former  had  long  felt  toward  the 
latter.  To  anticipate  the  progress  of  events  it  may  be 
added  that  the  sequel,  a  year  later,  was  the  unanimous 
reelection  of  Senator  King.  The  Clintonians  protested 
that  they  did  not  want  him,  yet  they  voted  for  him.  The 
Bucktails  were  still  more  hostile  to  him,  yet  under  the 
influence  of  a  most  adroit  manifesto  conceived  by  Van 
Buren  and  framed  by  William  L.  Marcy,  they  voted 
for  him.  It  was  a  well-deserved  tribute  to  a  man  of 
exceptional  merit  and  ability,  though  it  may  not  have 
been  so  intended.  Each  faction  probably  thought  that 
voting  for  him  would  be  the  best  way  out  of  an  awkward 
predicament. 

Following  the  complete  breach  between  the  Clin- 
tonians and  Bucktails  in  the  early  part  of  1819  came  an 
amazing  reversal  of  attitude  on  the  part  of  the  latter 
faction.  Down  to  that  time  it  had  been  inexorably 
opposed  to  Clinton's  canal  project  and  to  his  other  plans 
of  internal  improvements.  But  by  this  time  the  far- 


422  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

seeing  leaders  of  the  faction  had  seen  a  great  light. 
They  saw  that  in  spite  of  their  opposition  Clinton's 
great  plans  were  bound  to  be  realized,  to  the  immense 
advantage  of  the  State.  Their  own  attitude  was  like 
that  of  Dame  Partington  trying  to  sweep  back  the  rising 
tide  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean.  Accordingly,  without 
explanation  or  apology,  they  suddenly  reversed  their 
tactics,  accepted  the  canal  and  other  public  works,  and 
vied  with  the  Clintonians  in  praising  and  promoting 
them!  The  result  was  that  during  the  session  of  1819 
the  Legislature  authorized  the  Executive  to  proceed 
with  the  construction  of  the  entire  line  of  the  Erie 
canal,  from  Lake  Erie  to  the  Hudson  River. 

Governor  Clinton  suffered  a  defeat,  however,  in  the 
election  of  a  Canal  Commissioner.  Joseph  Ellicott 
resigned  that  office  in  the  summer  of  1818,  and  the  place 
was  rilled  according  to  law  by  appointment  by  the 
Governor,  the  appointment  to  hold  good  only  until  the 
next  Legislature  could  elect.  Clinton's  appointee  was 
Ephraim  Hart,  an  admirable  choice,  and  the  Governor 
confidently  assumed  that  the  Legislature  would  ratify 
it  by  permanent  election.  But  Van  Buren,  realizing 
the  political  influence  and  patronage  of  the  office,  in- 
trigued in  his  characteristic  fashion  against  Hart,  and 
succeeded  in  defeating  him.  Henry  Seymour,  a  man 
of  high  character  but  one  of  the  bitterest  enemies  of 
Clinton  in  the  whole  State,  was  elected  by  the  margin 
of  a  single  vote.  That  gave  the  Bucktails  a  majority  of 
the  Board  of  Canal  Commissioners  and  explained  their 
readiness  immediately  thereafter  to  drop  their  opposi- 
tion to  the  canal  project  and  to  vote  for  the  construction 


1819]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  423 

of  the  "ditch  from  the  Lakes  to  the  Sea"  which  had 
previously  been  the  favorite  butt  of  their  ridicule.  It 
made  all  the  difference  in  the  world  whether  they  or  the 
Clintonians  were  to  have  control  of  the  "patronage"  of 
the  work. 

During  this  session  a  highly  important  bill  was 
enacted  for  the  improvement  of  the  public  school  sys- 
tem. Chief-Justice  Thompson  of  the  Supreme  Court 
was  appointed  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  and  Ambrose 
Spencer  was  promoted  to  succeed  him.  For  the 
vacancy  in  the  Associate-Justiceship  thus  caused  the 
Federalists  put  forward  Samuel  Jones,  an  eminent  law- 
yer who  afterward  became  Chancellor  of  the  State. 
Clintonians  were  more  inclined  toward  John  Wood- 
worth,  who  for  several  years  had  been  Attorney-Gen- 
eral of  the  State,  also  an  excellent  man.  Still  others 
suggested  the  appointment  of  Martin  Van  Buren. 
Finally,  it  was  represented  that  the  existing  court  was 
greatly  overworked,  and  that  the  number  of  Justices 
should,  in  the  public  interest,  be  increased;  wherefore 
it  was  urged  that  all  three,  Jones,  Woodworth,  and  Van 
Buren,  should  be  appointed.  To  this  scheme,  however, 
the  Governor  was  opposed,  as  were  also  all  the  Justices 
of  the  Supreme  Court;  and  after  protracted  discussion 
the  Council  of  Appointment  finally  gave  the  place  to 
Mr.  Woodworth. 

In  the  spring  elections  of  1919  the  Federalists  ran 
"straight  tickets"  wherever  they  felt  sure  of  success,  and 
elsewhere  generally  supported  Clintonian  candidates. 
In  consequence  in  a  number  of  counties,  particularly  in 


424  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

the  Middle  district,  Clintonians  were  elected  although 
the  Bucktails  were  by  far  the  stronger  faction.  The  net 
result  of  the  elections  was  a  gain  for  the  Bucktails, 
though  the  Clintonians  retained  a  majority  of  the 
Assembly. 

After  the  election  and  after  the  adjournment  of  the 
Legislature,  several  acts  of  the  Council  of  Appointment 
emphasized  the  increasing  approachment  between 
Clinton  and  the  Federalists,  One  was  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  number  of  Justices  of  the  Peace,  some  of 
whom  were  Clintonians  and  some  Federalists  but  none 
Bucktails.  Another  was  the  removal  of  Richard  Riker 
from  the  Recordership  of  New  York  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  Peter  Augustus  Jay  in  his  place.  Mr.  Riker  had 
once  been  a  close  friend  of  Clinton,  but  had  turned 
against  him  when  Clinton  refused  to  second  his  nomina- 
tion for  the  Supreme  Court  but  secured  instead  the 
appointment  of  James  Platt.  Mr.  Jay  was  a  son  of  John 
Jay,  a  man  of  the  highest  character  and  ability,  whose 
appointment  was  generally  desired  by  the  bar  and  the 
leading  citizens  of  New  York  irrespective  of  party.  He 
was,  of  course,  a  Federalist.  A  third  incident  to  the  same 
effect  was  the  removal  of  Martin  Van  Buren  from  the 
office  of  Attorney-General  and  the  appointment  of 
Thomas  J.  Oakley  in  his  place.  This  was  done,  undis- 
guisedly,  because  Van  Buren  was  the  leader  of  the  oppo- 
sition to  Governor  Clinton;  though  Oakley  was  prob- 
ably the  better  man  for  the  place,  being  as  good  a  law- 
yer as  Van  Buren  and  less  likely  to  use  his  office  for 
partisan  ends.  Van  Buren,  believing  in  the  spoils  sys- 


1819]  DEWITT  CLINTON,  GOVERNOR  425 

tern,  did  not  complain  at  this  application  of  his  own 
principles  to  his  own  disadvantage,  but  his  friends  in 
the  press  raised  a  great  clamor  over  it  and  used  the 
incident  to  emphasize  the  breach  between  the  two 
Democratic  factions. 


CHAPTER  XXI 
THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS 

THE  legislative  session  of  1819  witnessed  the 
beginning  of  the  last  act  in  a  great  tragedy. 
There  was  enacted  on  April  13  a  bill  requiring 
the  State  Comptroller  to  liquidate  and  settle  the  residue 
of  the  accounts  of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  with  the  State 
of  New  York.  During  the  war,  as  already  recorded, 
the  Governor  had  been  intimately  concerned  with  the 
public  finances  of  the  State.  He  had  personally 
handled  millions  of  dollars,  of  both  State  and  national 
funds,  which  had  been  entrusted  to  him  for  disburse- 
ment for  war  purposes,  largely  at  his  own  discretion. 
Never,  perhaps,  had  a  man  been  thus  trusted  before. 
Never,  we  may  confidently  say,  had  anyone  more 
loyally  and  efficiently  discharged  such  a  trust.  For  his 
services  in  the  war  the  nation  owed  him  a  mighty  debt 
of  gratitude. 

Unfortunately,  in  one  respect  he  was  unfitted  for  such 
a  trust,  and  in  that  respect  he  discharged  it  most  unsatis- 
factorily. He  was  not  a  good  business  man.  He  was 
careless  and  unsystematic  in  the  keeping  of  accounts. 
He  entrusted  his  work  to  too  many  agents  and  did  not 
always  supervise  their  doings  with  sufficient  care.  He 
himself  paid  out  large  sums  of  money  without  proper 
vouchers.  Moreover,  he  inextricably  mixed  together 
national  funds  and  State  funds  and  his  own  private 
funds.  Probably,  too,  under  the  stress  of  war  and  in 

426 


1819]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  427 

his  zeal  to  faciliate  its  prosecution  he  at  times  spent 
public  money  more  freely  than  he  should  have  done. 
That  he  ever  misappropriated  a  single  cent  is  unthink- 
able. There  was  no  more  honest  man  in  the  world. 
But  the  end  of  the  war  found,  as  might  have  been 
expected,  his  accounts  in  a  hopeless  muddle. 

The  State  Comptroller  in  1816  found  that  there  was 
apparently  due  to  the  State  from  Mr.  Tompkins  the 
sum  oi  nearly  $120,000.  For  this  Mr.  Tompkins  could 
not  account,  and  accordingly  the  Legislature  in  1818 
referred  the  matter,  for  investigation,  to  a  commission 
consisting  of  William  A.  Bayard,  Cadwallader  D. 
Golden,  and  Robert  Bogardus.  These  gentlemen, 
eminent  for  character  and  ability,  were  directed  to 
examine  into  his  accounts  with  the  State  and  to  make  a 
settlement  of  them  on  a  basis  not  of  technicalities  but  of 
equity.  Mr.  Bayard  declined  to  serve,  but  Messrs. 
Golden  and  Bogardus  did  so,  with  painstaking  dili- 
gence. 

There  was  no  disputing  that  the  sum  in  question  was 
due  to  the  State.  But  Mr.  Tompkins  did  not  have  the 
money  and  could  not  pay  it.  Instead  he  presented  to 
the  Commissioners  certain  claims  against  the  State 
which  if  allowed  would  more  than  counterbalance  the 
shortage.  These  claims  were  chiefly  for  commissions 
and  royalties  on  loans,  premiums,  etc.,  such  as  the  State 
would  certainly  have  had  to  pay  to  bankers  had  they, 
instead  of  the  Governor,  handled  its  funds  and  per- 
formed its  fiscal  transactions.  There  was  no  doubt  that 
such  claims  were  honest  and  valid.  The  Commissioners 
accordingly  recommended  that  enough  of  the  claims  be 


428  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1819 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

allowed  to  counterbalance  the  deficit  in  his  accounts  to 
the  State,  and  the  Legislature,  as  stated,  ordered  the 
Comptroller  to  effect  a  settlement  with  the  ex-Gov- 
ernor, then  Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  on  that 
basis. 

But  that  was  not  to  be.  Mr.  Tompkins  logically  held 
that  if  his  claims  were  valid  in  part  they  were  valid  as 
a  whole,  since  all  were  of  precisely  the  same  nature ;  and 
he  therefore  insisted  that  all  should  be  allowed,  so  that 
instead  of  merely  paying  his  debt  to  the  State  they 
should  return  him  a  substantial  balance.  His  indebted- 
ness to  the  State  was  approximately  $120,000,  and  his 
claims  against  the  State  were  $250,000,  making  a 
balance  due  to  him  of  $130,000. 

This  precipitated  a  controversy,  chiefly  between  Mr. 
Tompkins  and  the  State  Comptroller,  Archibald 
Mclntyre,  in  which  both  the  letter  and  the  spirit  of  the 
act  of  the  Legislature  were  at  issue.  The  claim  which 
was  to  be  paid  under  the  act  was  for  the  premium  of  dif- 
ference in  value  between  treasury  notes  and  United 
States  bonds  on  the  one  hand  and  currency  on  the 
other,  on  a  capital  sum  of  about  a  million  dollars.  The 
Legislature  ordered  that  claim  to  be  paid,  on  the  sup- 
position— though  it  was  not  stated — that  the  premium 
was  twelve  per  cent.  That  would  have  made  $120,000, 
or  just  enough  to  balance  the  account.  But  the  ex-Gov- 
ernor and  his  friends  proved  that  the  premium  prevail- 
ing in  1814  was  twenty-five  per  cent,  which  would 
make  $250,000,  entitling  Mr.  Tompkins  to  a  balance  of 
$130,000. 


1819]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  429 

To  the  latter  the  Comptroller  demurred.  He  held, 
quite  rightly,  that  the  Legislature,  while  it  intended  to 
order  payment  of  the  claim,  and  of  the  claim  for  pre- 
mium on  the  whole  million  dollars,  meant  that  the 
claim  should  be  reckoned  at  only  $120,000.  To  escape 
paying  the  larger  sum,  therefore,  he  resorted  to  a 
technical  device  which  was  doubtless  quite  foreign  to 
the  intention  of  the  Legislature.  That  was,  to  grant 
the  premium  of  twenty-five  per  cent.,  but  to  reckon  it 
on  only  a  part  of  the  million  dollars.  He  noted  that 
the  act  ordered  payment  of  the  premium  on  all  moneys 
which  the  Governor  had  borrowed  "on  his  personal 
responsibility."  Now,  that  was  the  case  with  the  whole 
million  dollars.  But  the  Comptroller  held  that  that 
meant  moneys  borrowed  solely  on  his  personal  responsi- 
bility, with  no  other  security.  As  the  bulk  of  the  mil- 
lion dollars  had  been  borrowed  on  other  securities  as 
well  as  the  Governor's  responsibility,  the  Comptroller 
arbitrarily  refused  to  sanction  payment  of  the  premium 
thereon,  but  on  only  a  small  part  of  the  whole.  The 
controversy  was  conducted  with  much  animation 
throughout  the  remainder  of  1819,  long  letters  by  both 
Tompkins  and  Mclntyre  being  widely  published 
throughout  the  State,  without  an  agreement  being 
reached.  It  should  be  added  that  the  Comptroller  was 
a  man  of  great  ability,  who  was  held  deservedly  in  the 
highest  esteem  by  the  people  of  the  State,  and  there  was 
no  suspicion  of  any  but  entirely  upright  motives  on  his 
part,  just  as  there  was  no  suspicion  of  anything  but 
absolute  honesty  in  Mr.  Tompkins's  handling  of  public 
funds. 


430  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Matters  were  in  this  muddle  when  the  Forty-third 
Legislature  assembled  on  January  4,  1820.  John  C. 
Spencer,  of  Ontario  county,  was  elected  Speaker  of  the 
Assembly  by  sixty-four  votes,  cast  by  Clintonians  and 
Federalists,  against  fifty  for  Peter  Sharpe,  cast  by 
Bucktails,  and  seven  scattering  votes.  Governor  Clin- 
ton delivered  another  elaborate  and  statesmanlike 
address,  devoted  largely  to  the  subjects  of  canals  and 
other  public  works,  prisons,  schools,  and  the  pressing 
need  of  a  water  supply  for  the  city  of  New  York.  He 
also  strongly  urged  the  need  of  revision  of  the  Consti- 
tution, especially  criticising  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment and  advising  its  abolition.  To  that  end  he  recom- 
mended the  calling  of  a  Constitutional  convention.  As 
a  result  of  his  urging,  a  committee  of  the  Assembly  pre- 
sently reported  in  favor  of  calling  a  convention,  not  to 
prepare  a  new  Constitution  or  generally  to  revise  the 
existing  one,  but  specifically  to  revise  those  parts  relat- 
ing to  the  Council  of  Appointment  and  the  Council  of 
Revision,  and  to  the  qualifications  of  voters,  and  such 
other  parts  as  the  Legislature  might  designate.  A  bill 
providing  for  the  calling  of  such  a  convention  was 
drafted  and  introduced,  but  failed  of  passage. 

The  Governor  in  his  address  also  referred  to  the 
Missouri  Compromise,  and  recommended  that  the 
Legislature  should  make  some  declaration  on  the  sub- 
ject of  slavery.  In  consequence  the  Legislature 
adopted  a  concurrent  resolution  instructing  the  United 
States  Senators  from  New  York  and  requesting  the 
Representatives  to  vote  for  the  admission  of  no  new 


1820]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  431 

State  to  the  Union  without  a  prohibition  of  slavery  as 
an  indispensable  condition  of  such  admission. 

A  new  Council  of  Appointment  was  elected  by  the 
Assembly  on  February  4,  consisting  of  three  Clinton- 
ians,  John  Lounsbury,  Levi  Adams,  and  Ephraim  Hart, 
and  one  Bucktail,  John  D.  Ditmas.  Apart  from  a  few 
Sheriffs  and  other  minor  officers,  no  political  removals 
or  appointments  were  made;  probably  for  the  reason, 
chiefly,  that  all  the  places  were  already  filled  by  Clin- 
tonians  and  Federalists. 

Early  in  the  session  the  attention  of  the  Assembly  was 
called  by  Erastus  Root  to  a  newspaper  report  that  Wil- 
liam W.  Van  Ness,  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
had  been  implicated  in  some  proceedings  of  dubious 
propriety  in  connection  with  the  granting  of  a  charter 
to  the  Bank  of  America,  and  on  his  motion  a  committee 
was  appointed  to  investigate  the  matter  and  to  deter- 
mine whether  there  was  adequate  ground  for  impeach- 
ment proceedings.  Unfortunately  much  partisan  ani- 
mosity was  injected  into  the  case,  and  the  ultimate  dis- 
position of  it  was  made  on  party  lines,  the  Clintonians 
and  Federalists  voting  against  and  the  Bucktails  voting 
for  impeachment.  Justice  Van  Ness  was  thus  upheld 
and  exempted  from  impeachment  proceedings,  and  he 
doubtless  had  the  comfort  of  a  conscience  free  from 
reproach.  Yet  the  imputation  which  had  been  cast 
upon  him  was  so  deeply  taken  to  heart  that  his  health 
thereafter  steadily  and  hopelessly  failed. 

Meantime  a  still  greater  personal  and  political  con- 
flict was  brewing.  The  Bucktails  on  January  16  held 
a  caucus  and  unanimously  nominated  ex-Governor 


432  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Tompkins  for  the  Governorship,  believing  that  with 
him  they  could  defeat  Clinton,  who  was  a  candidate  for 
reelection.  They  were  of  course  not  unmindful  of  the 
financial  complications  in  which  he  was  involved,  and 
that  technically  he  was  a  defaulter.  But  they  rightly 
believed  his  integrity  to  be  above  question,  and  they  had 
confidence  to  believe  that  the  voters  of  the  State  would 
take  that  view.  He  had  not  lost  the  personal  charm 
which  in  former  years  had  given  him  an  unrivalled 
popularity;  his  record  as  a  War  Governor  had  given 
him  national  prominence;  he  had  been  chosen  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States.  As  a  candidate  in  for- 
mer elections  he  had  shown  extraordinary  strength. 
Moreover,  he  was  the  representative  of  genuine  Demo- 
cracy unmixed  with  mere  factionalism,  while  Clinton 
had  practically  separated  himself  from  the  Democratic 
party  to  lead  a  coalition  party  of  his  own,  consisting  of 
Clintonian  Democrats  and  Federalists.  It  was  shrewdly 
reckoned  that  the  nomination  would  rally  many  Demo- 
crats who  were  tired  of  factional  feuds  and  would,  if 
such  a  consummation  were  possible,  compass  the 
defeat  of  the  man  who  was  regarded  as  being — and  in 
fact  was — the  foremost  factionist  of  his  time. 

This  nomination  made  it  inevitable  that  the  matter  of 
Mr.  Tompkins's  accounts  should  be  taken  up  again  and 
pressed  to  some  determination.  Accordingly,  early  in 
the  session  of  the  Legislature  the  Comptroller  presented 
a  detailed  report  of  what  he  had  done,  or  had  tried  to 
do,  in  pursuance  of  the  act  of  the  preceding  Legislature. 
He  explained  the  radical  difference  of  opinion  between 


PETER  B.  PORTER 

Peter  B.  Porter;  born  in  Salisbury,  Conn.,  August  14,  1773; 
lawyer;  member  of  state  assembly,  1802;  removed  from  C'an- 
andaigua,  Ontario  county,  to  Buffalo  in  fall  of  1802;  member 
of  congress,  1809-13;  served  in  the  war  of  1812;  again  elected 
to  congress  and  served  from  March  4,  1815  to  January  23, 
1816  when  he  resigned  to  become  secretary  of  state  of  New 
York;  appointed  by  President  John  Quincy  Adams  as  secretary 
of  war  and  served  from  June  21,  1828  to  March  9,  1829;  died 
at  Niagara  Falls,  N.  Y.,  March  10,  1844. 


STEPHEN    VAN  RENSSELAER 

Stephen  Van  Rensselaer;  born  in  New  York  City,  November 
1,  1765;  member  of  assembly,  1789-91  and  1808-10;  state 
senate,  1791-96;  lieutenant  governor,  1795;  major  general  of 
volunteers  in  the  war  of  1812;  member  of  canal  commission, 
1.8l.6-39  and  cerved  14  years  as  its  president;  reflected  to 
assembly,  1818;  member  state  constitutional  convention,  1821; 
member  of  congress,  1822-29;  died  in  Albany,  N.  Y.,  January 
26,  1839. 


1820]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  433 

himself  and  the  former  Governor  concerning  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  act,  and  set  forth  in  full  the  grounds 
upon  which  his  own  opinion  was  based.  This  report 
was  referred  to  a  special  committee  of  the  Assembly, 
of  which  Jedediah  Miller,  of  Schoharie,  was  the  chair- 
man, and  of  which,  of  course,  a  majority  were  Clinton- 
ians.  The  committee  spent  much  time  in  consideration 
of  the  case,  not  merely  discussing  Mr.  Mclntyre's 
report  but  also  making  further  investigations  into  the 
matter  and  securing  the  opinions  of  various  jurists  con- 
cerning its  merits.  Finally,  on  March  16,  it  made  an 
elaborate  report  upon  the  case  and  recommended  that 
it  be  resolved,  as  the  sense  of  the  house,  that  the  course 
pursued  by  the  Comptroller  had  been  that  of  "a  firm, 
faithful,  and  intelligent  public  officer"  and  that  it  met 
with  athe  full  approbation"  of  the  Assembly. 

A  long  debate  ensued,  of  more  than  ordinary  bril- 
liancy and  power  on  both  sides.  The  Assembly  at  that 
time  contained  an  unusually  large  proportion  of  men 
of  high  intellectual  and  oratorical  ability,  and  the  argu- 
ments and  appeals  made  by  such  men  as  John  C. 
Spencer,  Thomas  J.  Oakley,  and  Elisha  Williams  on  the 
side  of  the  Comptroller,  and  Erastus  Root,  Peter 
Sharpe,  and  John  T.  Irving  for  ex-Governor  Tomp- 
kins,would  have  done  credit  to  any  legislative  assembly 
in  the  world.  That  the  resolution  would  be  favorably 
regarded  by  the  majority  of  the  Assembly  was,  however, 
a  foregone  conclusion,  since  there  was  a  Clintonian 
majority  in  that  house  and  the  question  was  bound  to 
be  decided  on  political  rather  than  juridical  grounds. 


434  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  resolution  was,  of  course,  a  hostile  reflection  upon 
the  ex-Governor,  and  was  thus  regarded  and  bitterly 
resented  by  his  friends. 

Meantime  another  important  move  in  the  same  cam- 
paign, but  in  the  other  direction,  was  begun  in  the 
Senate.  The  lead  was  there  taken  by  Martin  Van 
Buren,  who  on  January  12  offered  a  resolution,  which 
was  adopted,  calling  upon  the  Comptroller  for  a  full 
report  upon  the  matter.  Mr.  Mclntyre  responded  with 
an  account  of  the. controversy  between  himself  and  Mr. 
Tompkins,  and  with  a  detailed  statement  of  the  reasons 
for  his  refusal  to  allow  all  of  the  ex-Governor's  claims. 
The  matter  was  then  referred  to  a  special  committee,  of 
which  Van  Buren  was  the  chairman,  which  considered 
it  for  some  time  and  then  on  March  9  made  a  remark- 
able report,  in  which  Van  Buren  with  characteristic 
"foxiness"  strove  to  vindicate  Mr.  Tompkins — who 
really  needed  no  vindication — and  at  the  same  time  to 
avoid  any  heavy  draft  upon  the  State  treasury.  The 
report  was  to  the  effect  that  the  Comptroller  should 
have  allowed  to  Mr.  Tompkins  a  premium  of  twelve 
and  a  half  per  cent,  upon  the  whole  capital  sum  of 
$1,050,000.  That  would  have  amounted  to  $131,250. 
From  this  there  should  have  been  deducted  the  amount 
due  from  Mr.  Tompkins  to  the  State,  $1 19,379.50,  leav- 
ing a  balance  of  $11,870.50,  which  should  have  been 
paid  to  Mr.  Tompkins  in  final  settlement  of  the  whole 
account.  Van  Buren  accordingly  introduced  a  bill 
directing  that  the  sum  named  should  be  paid  to  the 
former  Governor  in  consideration  of  his  thereupon 
withdrawing  all  further  claims  upon  the  State. 


1820]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  435 

Against  this  bill  the  Clintonians  raged.  A  number 
of  their  Senators  spoke  against  it,  and  took  occasion  in 
their  speeches  to  reflect  very  unfavorably  upon  the 
former  Governor.  They  also  dwelt  upon  the  fact, 
which  was  not  denied  by  the  friends  of  Mr.  Tompkins, 
that  the  claims  which  he  had  made  against  the  State 
of  New  York  should  have  been  made,  if  valid,  against 
the  United  States  government,  since  it  was  to  it  that 
his  services  had  been  rendered.  Recognizing  the  force 
of  this,  Van  Buren  inserted  a  clause  in  the  bill  provid- 
ing that  the  full  amount  allowed  to  Mr.  Tompkins 
should  be  charged  by  the  State  of  New  York  against  the 
Federal  government.  The  only  speech  in  favor  of  the 
bill  was  made  by  Van  Buren  himself.  It  occupied  in 
delivery  the  greater  part  of  two  days,  and  was  regarded 
as  one  of  the  most  ingenious  and  persuasive  ever  made 
by  him.  The  bill  was  then  passed  by  the  Senate  by  a 
large  majority,  and  was  sent  to  the  Assembly. 

There  it  was  referred  to  a  special  committee  of  which 
Thomas  J.  Oakley  was  chairman,  and  on  April  6  was 
unfavorably  reported  on.  The  report  held  that  the 
action  of  the  Comptroller  had  been  entirely  correct, 
and  that  the  bill  already  enacted,  a  year  before,  under 
which  the  Comptroller  had  acted,  should  be  regarded 
as  a  finality;  and  it  recommended  that  the  Senate  bill 
should  be  made  to  provide  simply  that  if  Mr.  Tomp- 
kins did  not  pay  to  the  State  the  sum  due  to  it  on  or 
before  August  1,  1820,  the  Comptroller  should  begin 
action  against  him  to  compel  payment,  in  which  suit, 
however,  he  should  be  permitted  to  present  his  claims 
for  a  premium  as  an  offset.  This  report  was  favorably 


436  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

acted  upon  by  the  Assembly,  and  the  Senate  bill  was 
thus  amended.  But  the  Senate  declined  to  concur  in 
the  amendment,  and  so  neither  the  original  Senate  bill 
nor  the  Assembly  substitute  was  ever  enacted.  Indeed, 
nothing  more  was  done  about  the  matter  at  that  time. 
The  election  was  at  hand,  and  all  possible  political 
capital,  both  for  and  against  Mr.  Tompkins,  but 
chiefly  against  him,  had  been  made  out  of  the  wretched 
wrangle.  More  than  six  months  later,  after  the  nation 
had  reflected  him  Vice-President,  on  November  10, 
1820,  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  State  Senate 
releasing  him  from  all  claims  by  the  State  in  considera- 
tion of  his  releasing  the  State  from  all  his  claims  against 
it,  and  thus  settling  the  matter.  This  bill  was  hastily 
enacted,  with  practically  no  opposition,  all  men  being 
eager,  for  decency's  sake,  to  bury  the  scandal  out  of 
sight.  Years  afterward,  after  Tompkins's  death,  the 
State  government  discovered  and  acknowledged  that 
it  had  rightfully  owed  him  more  than  ninety  thousand 
dollars  over  and  above  its  claim  against  him. 

Mr.  Tompkins  had  been  nominated  for  Governor  by 
a  caucus  of  the  anti-Clintonian  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature, according  to  usage.  No  fewer  than  sixty-four 
members  were  present  at  the  caucus.  Benjamin 
Mooers,  of  Plattsburgh,  a  Senator,  was  nominated  for 
Lieutenant-Governor.  He  had,  by  the  way,  been 
elected  to  the  Senate  at  the  preceding  election  as  a 
Clintonian.  The  supporters  of  Clinton,  though  in  the 
majority  in  the  Assembly,  were  in  a  minority  in  the 
Legislature  as  a  whole.  Not  wishing  to  advertise  this 
fact  by  holding  a  caucus,  therefore,  they  pretended  to 


1820]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  437 

disapprove  that  method  of  making  nominations,  and 
instead  called  a  public  meeting  of  the  citizens  of 
Albany,  at  which  Governor  Clinton  was  formally 
renominated,  with  John  Tayler  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor. 

On  the  eve  of  the  election  fifty  of  the  foremost  Fed- 
eralists of  the  State,  comprising  an  impressive  propor- 
tion of  men  of  wealth,  learning,  and  generally  high 
standing,  put  forth  an  address  to  the  people  of  the 
State  urging  the  election  of  Mr.  Tompkins  and 
especially  opposing  the  reelection  of  DeWitt  Clinton, 
not  because  of  any  disapproval  of  his  character,  or  of 
the  measures  with  which  he  was  identified,  but  simply 
because  he  was  trying  to  form  a  personal  party  and 
thus  to  exalt  a  certain  form  of  autocracy  above  democ- 
racy. The  address  also  declared  that  the  Federalist 
party,  to  which  they  had  belonged,  had  been  dissolved 
and  had  ceased  to  exist.  There  is  no  doubt  that  this 
manifesto  had  considerable  influence  with  the  voters 
of  the  State. 

The  campaign  was  bitterly  contested  down  to  the 
very  moment  of  the  closing  of  the  polls,  and  the  sole 
issue  was  whether  DeWitt  Clinton  should  continue  to 
direct  the  State  government.  There  was  no  question 
of  policy,  for  Van  Buren  was  as  much  committed  to  the 
completion  of  the  canal  as  Clinton  himself.  But 
Clinton's  friends  contended  that,  having  conceived  and 
begun  the  great  work,  he  should  be  permitted  to  com- 
plete it;  while  his  foes  insisted  that  it  could  be  finished 
by  someone  else  just  as  well,  while  in  all  other  respects 
the  State  would  be  better  off  without  Clinton,  who  was 


438  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

a  disturbing  element.  Van  Buren  expected  Tompkins 
to  be  elected,  to  the  very  last.  On  the  other  hand, 
Clinton  was  equally  confident  of  winning.  The  result 
was  in  fact  exceptionally  close.  Clinton  was  success- 
ful by  the  small  majority  of  1,450,  getting  47,444  votes 
to  Tompkins's  45,990.  But  in  the  Legislature  the 
Bucktails  were  overwhelmingly  victorious.  They 
increased  their  majority  in  the  Senate,  and  transformed 
a  Clintonian  majority  in  the  Assembly  to  a  Bucktail 
majority  of  eighteen. 

To  Mr.  Tompkins  the  result  was  a  tragedy.  He  was 
unable  to  rid  himself  of  the  notion — though  it  was 
altogether  erroneous — that  the  controversy  over  his 
accounts  had  turned  the  people  against  him,  and  that 
they  widely  regarded  him  as  a  defaulter  and  as  a  false 
claimant.  Upon  this  he  brooded,  to  the  verge  of 
melancholia.  His  reelection  to  the  Vice-Presidency, 
and  the  settlement  of  his  accounts  by  the  Legislature,  as 
already  related,  did  not  console  him.  In  1821  he  was 
elected  a  delegate  to  the  New  York  State  Constitutional 
convention,  and  that  convention  made  him  its  presi- 
dent, a  place  which  he  filled  with  fine  dignity,  urbanity, 
and  ability.  But  the  iron  had  entered  his  soul.  His 
once  sunny  and  lovable  disposition  became  soured  and 
irritable.  His  superb  physical  frame  drooped  and 
shrank.  He  indulged  too  much  in  strong  drink.  And 
at  the  age  of  fifty-one,  soon  after  completing  his  second 
term  as  Vice-President,  he  died,  leaving  the  memory 
of  one  of  the  most  engaging  and  attractive  figures  that 
have  ever  adorned  the  public  life  of  the  State  of  New 


1820]  THE  PASSING  OF  TOMPKINS  439 

York,  or,  indeed,  of  the  United  States,  untimely  driven 
from  the  scene  in  circumstances  reflecting  discredit  and 
reproach  upon  almost  everybody  concerned  in  them 
excepting  himself. 


CHAPTER  XXII 
BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON 

LAYING  politics"  has  unfortunately  too  often 
been  a  favorite  occupation  of  the  Legislature 
of  the  State  of  New  York.  We  have  had  occa- 
sion hitherto  to  record  many  examples  of  it,  sometimes 
of  a  kind  most  discreditable,  and  costly  to  the  welfare 
of  the  commonwealth.  It  is  to  be  doubted  whether 
any  dozen  of  the  first  forty- two  Legislatures  put  together 
indulged  in  that  reprehensible  practice  so  much  as  the 
one  Legislature,  the  Forty-third,  whose  doings  we  have 
just  briefly  recorded.  Since  its  time  its  political  activi- 
ties and  antics  have  been  immeasurably  surpassed,  as 
we  shall  have  occasion  to  see.  And  indeed  it  may  be 
that  its  partisan  record  was  surpassed  by  that  of  its 
immediate  successor,  the  Forty-fourth.  There  can  be 
little  question  that  these  two  bodies  were  far  above 
the  average  in  the  ability  of  their  members.  But  high 
intellectual  ability  and  the  purest  personal  character 
seemed  to  afford  no  bar  against  the  intensest  partisan- 
ship nor  any  deterrent  upon  its  practice. 

The  Forty-third  Legislature,  then,  adjourned  on 
April  14,  1820,  after  providing  for  the  assembling  of  its 
successor  in  special  session  for  the  choice  of  Presidential 
Electors.  The  special  session  began  on  November  7, 
1820,  when  Peter  Sharpe,  a  Bucktail,  of  New  York, 
was  elected  Speaker  of  the  Assembly  by  69  votes  against 
52  for  John  C.  Spencer,  the  Clintonian  candidate. 

440 


1820]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  441 

Although  the  special  purpose  of  the  session  was  the 
choice  of  Presidential  Electors,  the  Legislature 
addressed  itself  to  much  other  important  business,  and 
the  Governor's  message,  or  speech,  was,  like  its  prede- 
cessors, long,  elaborate,  and  filled  with  recommenda- 
tions of  constructive  statesmanship. 

One  of  his  recommendations  was  for  the  enactment  of 
a  law  providing  for  the  choice  of  Presidential  Electors 
by  the  people  at  a  general  election  and  on  a  general 
State  ticket;  this  arrangement  to  remain  in  force  until 
the  United  States  Constitution  should  be  so  amended — 
as  he  expected  it  to  be — as  to  require  Electors  to  be 
chosen  by  the  people,  by  districts,  in  all  States.  He 
also  made  a  vigorous  protest  against  the  interference  of 
Federal  officers  in  State  politics  or  State  elections. 
This  evil  certainly  did  exist,  to  an  extent  which  war- 
ranted him  in  apprehending  that,  if  not  checked,  it 
would  in  time  undermine  and  destroy  the  fabric  of  free 
government.  He  urged  that  the  State  should  resolutely 
resist  this  malign  tendency,  and  expressed  a  hope  that 
Congress  would  realize  that  it  was  its  duty  to  take 
remedial  action  concerning  it. 

His  most  important  recommendation,  however,  was 
that  for  the  holding  of  a  Constitutional  convention. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  he  was  at  least  in  part  moved 
to  this  by  the  course  of  his  political  adversaries.  In 
the  preceding  August  the  Bucktails  had  held  a  large 
meeting  at  Tammany  Hall,  in  New  York,  at  which  a 
resolution  was  adopted  declaring  that  a  convention 
ought  to  be  held,  with  unlimited  powers  to  revise  the 
Constitution  of  the  State.  There  was  no  doubt  that  the 


442  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

sentiment  of  the  people  of  all  parties  was  turning  in  that 
direction,  and,  intolerant  and  contemptuous  as  he  often 
was  of  the  advice  and  the  example  of  others,  Clinton 
probably  thought  that  it  was  desirable  to  identify  him- 
self with  the  movement  as  a  leader  in  it  rather  than 
let  others  have  all  that  distinction  and  himself  be  ulti- 
mately forced  into  it  as  a  follower.  His  recommenda- 
tion concerning  a  convention  was  notably  judicious  and 
statesmanlike — to  the  effect  that  the  Legislature  should 
simply  submit  to  the  people  the  question  whether  such 
a  convention  should  be  called,  to  be  decided  by  a  major- 
ity of  the  popular  vote,  and  that  the  result  of  the  conven- 
tion should  be  submitted  to  the  people,  to  be  approved 
or  rejected  by  popular  vote  before  becoming  effective. 
He  particularly  emphasized  the  need  of  abolition  of 
the  Council  of  Appointment,  declaring  that  "If  the 
ingenuity  of  man  had  been  exercised  to  organize  the 
appointing  power  in  such  a  way  as  to  produce  continual 
intrigue  and  commotion  in  this  State,  none  could  have 
been  devised  with  more  effect  than  the  present  arrange- 
ment." Reviewing  the  record  of  that  Council,  it  is  not 
easy  to  convict  Clinton  of  extravagance  in  this  judg- 
ment, though  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  nobody  sur- 
passed him  in  misuse  of  the  Council. 

The  Legislature  followed  his  recommendation  so 
far  as  to  pass  a  bill  providing  for  a  Constitutional  con- 
vention. But,  its  majority  being  hostile  to  him,  it 
foolishly  ignored  his  wise  recommendation  that  the 
question  be  referred  to  the  people,  but  directly  ordered 
the  calling  of  a  convention.  The  result  was  that  the 
Council  of  Revision  vetoed  it,  the  illustrious  Chancellor 


1820]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  443 

Kent  himself  writing  the  decision,  and  vetoed  it  on  that 
very  ground,  that  it  ordered  the  holding  of  a  convention 
instead  of  letting  the  people  decide  whether  to  do  so 
or  not.  Had  the  bill  been  framed  in  accordance  with 
Clinton's  suggestion  it  would  have  been  approved  and 
would  have  become  law. 

The  very  day  after  the  Governor  in  his  message 
delivered  that  scathing  condemnation  of  the  Council  of 
Appointment  the  Assembly  elected  a  new  Council,  and 
by  a  strict  party  vote  elected  four  anti-Clintonian 
Senators:  Walter  Bowne,  of  the  Southern  district; 
John  T.  Moore,  of  the  Middle;  Roger  Skinner,  of  the 
Eastern;  and  David  E.  Evans,  of  the  Western.  The 
election  of  Mr.  Skinner  was  widely  regarded  as  little 
short  of  scandalous.  He  had  for  nearly  a  year  been 
holding  office  as  United  States  Judge  for  the  Northern 
district  of  New  York.  That  he  should  be  permitted 
to  serve  at  the  same  time  as  a  State  Senator  was  bad 
enough.  It  was  contrary  to  a  former  resolution  of  the 
Senate.  But  that  he  should  also  be  elected  a  member 
of  the  Council  of  Appointment  was  revolting  to  a  large 
part  of  his  own  political  party.  It  so  incensed  the 
State  that  when  the  Constitutional  convention  met  the 
next  year,  one  of  the  very  first  things  proposed  and 
agreed  upon  was  a  section  forbidding  such  holding  of 
Federal  and  State  offices  at  the  same  time.  This  new 
Council  did  not  actually  assume  office  and  discharge 
any  of  its  functions  until  the  regular  session  of  the 
Legislature,  in  January,  1821. 

The  day  after  the  election  of  the  Council  the  Legis- 
lature chose  Presidential  Electors.  It  was  a  foregone 


444  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1820 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

conclusion,  of  course,  that  Monroe  and  Tompkins  were 
to  be  reflected.  Yet  Bucktails  and  Clintonians  voted 
for  two  separate  sets  of  candidates,  the  former  winning 
by  a  strict  party  vote. 

The  session  was  marked  by  the  introduction  by 
Erastus  Root  of  a  resolution  declaring  that  human 
slavery  could  not  exist  in  the  State  of  New  York.  In  a 
speech  of  great  power  he  argued  that  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  was  the  supreme  law  of  the  United 
States,  that  it  declared  that  all  men  were  created  equal, 
and  that  therefore  it  was  impossible  that  any  person 
should  be  born  a  slave.  He  was,  however,  unable  to 
get  the  Legislature  to  vote  upon  the  measure. 

One  of  the  most  violent  controversies  of  the  session 
was  that  over  the  Governor's  protest  against  the  inter- 
ference of  Federal  office-holders  in  New  York  elections. 
The  State  Senate  passed  a  resolution  asking  him  to  lay 
before  it  such  information  as  he  possessed  relative  to  the 
formation  of  such  officers  in  "an  organized  and  dis- 
ciplined corps,"  the  intimation  being  that  Clinton  had 
declared  them  to  be  thus  organized.  In  fact  he  had 
not,  but  had  merely  predicted  what  might  be  expected 
in  case  they  should  thus  become  organized.  But  Clin- 
ton made  no  attempt  at  a  correction,  but  contented 
himself  with  answering  that  he  would  "in  due  time" 
make  a  communication  on  the  subject  which  he  hoped 
would  be  satisfactory  to  the  Senate,  a  tone  of  fine  irony 
being  manifest  in  his  reply.  This  stung  the  Senate  to 
the  quick,  and  it  retorted  by  adopting  a  resolution  set- 
ting forth  that  the  Governor  had  not  furnished  the 
Senate  with  any  proof  of  the  charges  which  he  had 


1820-1]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  445 

made  against  the  Federal  government,  that  it  was 
highly  improper  to  make  such  charges  without  having 
in  his  possession  ample  testimony  to  support  them,  and 
that  therefore  the  Senate  had  the  strictest  confidence 
in  the  patriotism  and  integrity  of  the  national  govern- 
ment and  would  not  change  its  opinion  save  upon  full 
and  satisfactory  testimony.  This  resolution  was 
adopted  by  a  strict  party  vote.  On  receiving  the  next 
day  an  official  copy  of  it,  Clinton  wrote  to  the  Senate 
declaring  that  he  would  fully  notice  the  whole  matter 
at  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  and  expressing 
sincere  regret  that  the  Senate  should,  in  so  unprece- 
dented a  manner,  have  lost  sight  of  the  respect  due  to 
itself  and  of  the  courtesy  due  to  a  coordinate  branch  of 
the  government.  This  dignified  rebuke  drove  the  anti- 
Clintonian  Senators  so  nearly  mad  that  they  voted  to 
return  it  to  the  Governor,  and  the  next  moment 
adjourned  until  January,  1821. 

The  Legislature  adjourned  on  November  21,  1820, 
and  reassembled  for  its  regular  session  on  January  9, 
1821.  A  week  later  the  Governor  sent  in  to  the 
Assembly  a  voluminous  message  on  the  subject  of 
Federal  office-holders  and  their  interference  in  New 
York  politics.  Because  it  was  so  voluminous  and  was 
accompanied  with  so  many  letters,  affidavits,  and  other 
documents,  the  Governor  sent  it  to  the  Assembly  in  a 
large  green  bag,  such  as  lawyers  used  for  carrying 
papers,  from  which  circumstance  it  was  called  the 
"Green  Bag  Message."  In  the  message  and  documents 
it  was  shown  that  the  naval  storeskeeper  in  Brooklyn 
and  various  other  officials  had  been  very  active  and 


446  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

energetic  against  the  Clintonian  candidates  for  the 
Legislature  at  the  last  election,  and  that  others  else- 
where in  the  State  had  likewise  been.  Among  the 
accompanying  documents  was  a  letter  which  Martin 
Van  Buren  had  written  to  Henry  Meigs,  a  Represen- 
tative in  Congress  from  New  York  City,  urging  the 
removal  of  certain  postmasters  who  were  friends  of 
Clinton  and  the  appointment  of  anti-Clintonians  in 
their  places.  He  made  no  charges  against  the  men, 
save  a  vague  complaint  that  it  seemed  impossible  to 
get  Bucktail  newspapers  distributed  through  the  mails. 
The  men  were  to  be  removed  solely  for  political  pur- 
poses. Two  of  the  men  whose  removal  had  thus  been 
suggested  by  Van  Buren  were  promptly  dismissed  from 
their  places;  but  there  is  no  proof  that  there  was  any 
consequent  improvement  in  the  mail  service.  The 
"Green  Bag  Message"  was  referred  to  a  joint  com- 
mittee of  the  two  houses,  which  on  March  15  made  a 
violently  partisan  report,  savagely  abusing  the  Gover- 
nor and  denying  the  truth  of  his  allegations. 

In  defiance  of  this  exposure  of  Van  Buren's  partisan- 
ship, the  Bucktails  made  him  their  candidate  for  the 
United  States  Senatorship,  to  succeed  Nathan  Sanford, 
whose  term  was  about  to  expire.  Now,  Sanford  was  a 
Tammany  Hall  man  and  was  intensely  hostile  to  Clin- 
ton. Yet  in  hope  of  defeating  Van  Buren  the  Gover- 
nor directed  every  one  of  his  followers  in  the  Legis- 
lature to  vote  for  Sanford's  reelection.  His  thought 
was  that  a  number  of  the  Bucktails  might  be  induced 
to  vote  for  Sanford.  But  it  was  in  vain.  All  the 
Bucktails  voted  for  Van  Buren  and  he  was  elected  by 


1821]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  447 

a  strict  party  vote.  At  this  time  Clinton  was  furious 
against  Van  Buren,  calling  him  in  one  of  his  letters  an 
"arch-scoundrel,"  and  again  a  "corrupt  scoundrel." 

The  most  important  business  of  the  session  was  the 
passing  of  another  bill  for  a  Constitutional  convention. 
The  committee  to  which  the  veto  of  the  former  bill  had 
been  submitted  made  a  long  report,  bitterly  denouncing 
the  Council  of  Revision  for  its  action.  Then  John  C. 
Spencer  proposed  to  introduce  a  bill  providing  that  at 
the  coming  general  election  in  April  the  people  should 
vote  whether  there  should  be  a  convention ;  that  if  they 
ordered  it  to  be  held  the  Governor  should  announce 
the  fact  and  the  election  should  be  held  in  June;  that 
the  delegates  should  be  chosen  by  the  counties  in  pro- 
portion to  their  population;  and  that  all  amendments 
adopted  by  the  convention  should  be  submitted  to  the 
people  for  ratification  or  rejection,  each  amendment 
being  separately  considered  and  acted  upon.  This 
admirable  plan,  which  was  in  accord  with  the  Gover- 
nor's recommendation  and  which  was  free  from  the 
objectionable  features  which  the  Council  of  Revision 
had  found  in  the  other  bill,  was  made  a  victim  of  parti- 
san animosity.  Permission  to  introduce  the  measure 
was  refused  to  Mr.  Spencer,  on  the  technical  ground 
that  the  former  bill  was  still  before  the  house  and  must 
first  be  disposed  of. 

A  long  and  acrimonious  debate  on  that  former  bill 
ensued,  in  which  many  days  of  the  session  were  wasted. 
Finally  a  vote  was  taken  upon  it,  and  it  was  lost,  fail- 
ing to  receive  the  needed  two-thirds  majority.  Then, 
instead  of  welcoming  Mr.  Spencer's  proposal,  the 


448  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Bucktail  majority  directed  the  committee  to  which  the 
veto  of  the  bill  had  been  referred  to  draft  and  present 
a  new  bill.  It  did  so,  but  the  new  bill  was  so  much  like 
the  old  that  it  was  practically  certain  that  the  Council 
of  Revision  would  veto  it  for  the  same  reasons  as 
before.  Then  an  amendment  was  proposed,  avoiding 
a  veto  by  submitting  to  the  people  the  question  whether 
the  convention  should  be  held.  Over  this  a  long  debate 
occurred,  after  which  it  was  adopted  by  the  votes  of  the 
Clintonians  and  some  Bucktails,  though  practically  all 
of  the  Bucktail  leaders,  with  the  exception  of  Erastus 
Root,  voted  against  it.  The  bill  as  thus  amended  was 
then  passed  by  the  Legislature  and  was  approved  by 
the  Council  of  Revision. 

At  this  session  the  Legislature  added  another  mem- 
ber to  the  Board  of  Canal  Commissioners,  selecting  for 
the  place  William  C.  Bouck,  who  was  then  a  Senator 
from  Schoharie  county,  a  member  of  the  Bucktail  party, 
and  who  was  destined  to  play  thereafter  an  important 
part  in  the  political  history  of  the  State.  The  session 
was  prolonged  until  April  3,  when  it  adjourned  with- 
out day. 

Meantime  the  moribund  Council  of  Appointment, 
dominated  by  Roger  Skinner,  a  bitter  political  and  per- 
sonal foe  of  the  Governor,  and  popularly  known  as 
"Skinner's  Council,"  diligently  applied  the  principle 
that  "to  the  victors  belong  the  spoils."  After  dismiss- 
ing the  Sheriffs  of  eleven  counties  and  appointing  Buck- 
tail  partisans  in  their  places,  it  removed  Archibald 
Mclntyre  from  the  office  of  State  Comptroller.  He 
had  held  the  place  for  many  years  under  a  succession 


NATHAN  SANFORD 

Nathan  Sanford;  born  in  Bridgehamton,  L.  I.,  November 
5,  1777;  lawyer;  United  States  commissioner  in  bankruptcy, 
1802;  United  States  attorney  for  New  York,  1803-15;  member 
state  legislature,  1808-9,  1811;  member  state  senate,  1812-15; 
United  States  senator,  1815-21;  delegate  to  state  constitutional 
convention,  1821;  chancellor  of  New  York,  1823-25;  again 
elected  to  United  States  senate,  serving  from  1826-31  ;  died  at 
Flushing,  N.  Y.,  October  17,  1838. 


1821]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  449 

of  Councils  of  varying  political  complexions,  and  had 
come  to  be  regarded  as  a  non-political  official  who, 
because  of  the  value  of  his  experience,  should  be  per- 
manently retained.  His  capacity  and  character  were 
above  suspicion.  But  he  had  not  stood  with  the  Buck- 
tails  in  support  of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  against  DeWitt 
Clinton,  and  therefore  he  had  to  go.  His  successor, 
John  Savage,  was  an  excellent  man,  who  had  not 
sought  the  place  and  who  probably  would  not  have 
wished  the  change  to  be  made. 

The  same  day  the  Council  removed  Thomas  J. 
Oakley  from  the  office  of  Attorney-General,  of  course 
because  of  his  friendship  for  Clinton.  In  his  place  it 
appointed  Samuel  A.  Talcott,  a  young  lawyer  of  Utica, 
until  then  not  conspicuous  in  State  affairs.  He  had 
been  a  Federalist,  but  refused  to  go  with  the  bulk  of  that 
party  in  supporting  Clinton  and  was  therefore 
welcomed  into  the  ranks  of  the  Bucktails.  He  was  a 
close  friend  of  Martin  Van  Buren,  and  was  the  latter's 
personal  choice  for  the  place.  Of  his  excellent  char- 
acter and  high  professional  abilities  there  was  no  ques- 
tion. Cadwallader  D.  Golden  was  removed  from  the 
Mayoralty  of  New  York  City  and  was  replaced  with 
Stephen  Allen,  and  Peter  A.  Jay  was  removed  from 
the  Recordership  to  make  room  for  Richard  Riker. 

The  Council,  as  if  determined  to  make  as  bad  a 
record  as  possible,  then  made  a  "clean  sweep"  of  every 
Sheriff,  Surrogate,  County  Clerk,  County  Judge,  and 
Justice  of  the  Peace  in  the  State  who  was  so  much  as 
suspected  of  favoring  Governor  Clinton.  It  even 
invaded  the  military  establishment  and  dismissed,  for 


450  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1321 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

purely  political  reasons,  General  Anthony  Lamb,  the 
Commissary-General,  and  General  Solomon  Van  Ren- 
sselaer,  the  Adjutant-General.  To  the  former  place 
Alexander  M.  Muir,  a  loyal  Bucktail,  was  appointed. 
The  removal  of  General  Van  Rensselaer  created  a 
sensation  and  provoked  widespread  protests,  because  of 
his  services  in  the  late  war  and  his  long  connection 
with  the  militia.  He  was  replaced  by  the  Council  with 
William  L.  Marcy,  who  thus  took  another  step  toward 
the  national  distinction  which  he  ultimately  won. 

Worst  of  all  the  Council's  acts,  however,  was  the  dis- 
missal of  Gideon  Hawley  from  the  office  of  Superin- 
tendent of  Schools.  He  was  a  man  of  the  highest 
character  and  ability,  of  signal  devotion  to  the  cause  of 
popular  education,  who  had  during  a  number  of  years 
rendered  invaluable  services  to  the  State  for  a  meager 
recompense.  More  than  any  other  man  he  is  entitled 
to  grateful  remembrance  as  the  founder  of  the  New 
York  public  school  system.  Moreover,  he  had  scru- 
pulously refrained  from  political  activities  of  any  kind. 
Yet  without  the  pretense  of  dissatisfaction  with  him  he 
was  turned  out  of  office  and  was  replaced  by  one  Wel- 
come Esleeck,  a  third-rate  attorney  with  no  fitness 
whatever  for  the  place.  The  scandal  was  so  flagrant 
that  the  Bucktails  in  the  Legislature  themselves  revolted 
against  it.  On  the  initiative  of  Erastus  Root  a  bill  was 
passed  by  acclamation  legislating  the  egregious  Esleeck 
out  of  office  by  providing  that  thenceforth  the  Secretary 
of  State  should  ex-officio  be  Superintendent  of  Schools. 
The  Secretary  of  State  at  that  time  was  John  Van  Ness 
Yates,  who  was  at  least  a  man  of  high  attainments, 


1821]  BUCKTAILS  AGAINST  CLINTON  451 

though  without  special  fitness  for  educational  work. 
It  was  a  good  thing  to  exchange  him  for  Esleeck, 
though  it  was  of  course  a  bad  thing  to  make  a  distinc- 
tively political  officer  and  politician  head  of  a  great 
department  from  which  party  politics  should  always 
be  scrupulously  excluded. 

Following  these  things  came  the  April  elections. 
Archibald  Mclntyre  after  his  removal  from  the  Comp- 
trollership  was  nominated  for  Senator  in  the  Middle 
district,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  him  a  popular  vindi- 
cation. Although  the  district  at  the  preceding  election 
had  given  a  Bucktail  majority  of  about  800,  he  was 
elected  by  about  400,  a  result  which  added  to  the 
popular  condemnation  of  the  Council  of  Appointment. 
Elsewhere  the  Bucktails  were  generally  successful  in 
at  least  holding  their  ground.  They  elected  70  mem- 
bers of  the  Assembly,  to  the  Clintonians'  52.  Of 
the  eight  Senators  elected  five  were  Clintonians  and 
three  Bucktails.  The  Bucktails  would  probably  have 
elected  five  to  the  Clintonians'  three  had  it  not  been  for 
the  candidacy  of  Mr.  Mclntyre,  which  resulted  in  his 
election  and  also  that  of  his  Clintonian  colleague, 
Abraham  Hasbrouck,  in  the  Middle  district. 

The  most  notable  feature  of  the  election  was,  how- 
ever, the  overwhelming  majority  in  favor  of  a  Consti- 
tutional convention.  There  had  for  years  been  a 
growing  feeling  among  thoughtful  men  that  the  Con- 
stitution needed  revision,  particularly  in  respect  to  the 
appointing  power.  To  that  sentiment  "Skinner's 
Council"  during  the  three  months  immediately  pre- 
ceding the  election  gave  a  powerful  impetus.  Indeed, 


452  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  anything  that  could 
more  strongly  have  influenced  the  people  of  the  State 
to  vote  for  constitutional  revision — which  was  sure, 
first  and  foremost,  to  wipe  that  Council  out  of  existence 
—than  such  performances  as  the  arbitrarry  removal  of 
such  men  as  Messrs.  Mclntyre,  Van  Rensselaer,  and 
Hawley.  True,  the  people  were  not  yet,  and  would 
not  be  for  many  years,  ready  to  make  an  end  of  the 
spoils  system.  But  at  least  they  purposed  to  have  that 
system  administered  in  some  more  responsible  fashion 
than  by  that  utterly  discredited  Council.  So  they  polled 
a  majority  of  74,445  votes  in  favor  of  a  Constitutional 
convention  with  plenary  powers. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 
A  NEW  CONSTITUTION 

THE  Legislature  in  March,  1821,  submitted  to  the 
people  the  question  of  a  Constitutional  conven- 
tion. The  people  in  April  following  voted  for 
such  a  convention,  with  plenary  power,  by  109,000  to 
35,000.  On  the  third  Tuesday  of  June  a  special  elec- 
tion was  held  for  Delegates  to  the  convention,  these 
being  chosen  on  county  tickets.  In  the  greater  part  of 
the  State  party  lines  were  sharply  drawn,  and  the  Buck- 
tails  were  generally  successful.  There  were  some 
exceptions,  however,  notably  in  Oneida  county,  where 
a  mixed  delegation  of  Bucktails,  Clintonians,  and  Fed- 
eralists was  elected.  The  convention  met  at  Albany  on 
August  28,  1821,  and  was  overwhelmingly  Bucktail  in 
complexion,  as  was  indicated  by  the  vote  of  94  to  16  by 
which  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  was  chosen  to  be  its 
chairman. 

It  was  for  ability  and  character  one  of  the  most  note- 
worthy bodies  that  ever  assembled  in  the  State.  Among 
its  members  were  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  Vice-President 
of  the  United  States;  Rufus  King  and  Martin  Van 
Buren,  United  States  Senators;  James  Kent,  Chancellor 
of  the  State;  Erastus  Root,  Abraham  Van  Vechten, 
Ambrose  Spencer,  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  Nathan 
Sanford,  Peter  Augustus  Jay,  William  W.  Van  Ness, 
Peter  Sharpe,  Jacob  Radcliffe,  Jonas  Platt,  Elisha 

453 


454  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Williams,  James  Tallmadge,  Peter  R.  Livingston, 
Samuel  Young.  Ezekiel  Bacon,  Nathan  Williams, 
John  Duer,  Samuel  Nelson,  Jacob  Sutherland,  and 
other  men  of  genuine  "light  and  leading." 

It  was  from  the  outset  the  purpose  of  the  convention 
to  make  a  radical  revision  of  the  Constitution,  amount- 
ing to  a  practically  new  instrument.  The  work  was 
apportioned  among  ten  committees,  respectively  on  the 
Legislative  department,  the  Executive  department, 
the  Judiciary  department,  the  Council  of  Revision,  the 
Council  of  Appointment,  the  right  of  suffrage,  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  citizens,  the  commencement  of 
the  legislative  year,  the  mode  of  making  future  revi- 
sions, and  all  other  topics  in  the  Constitution  not  already 
mentioned. 

The  first  important  action  taken  by  the  convention 
for  actual  revision  of  the  Constitution  was  the  abolition 
of  the  Council  of  Revision  and  the  vesting  of  the  veto 
power  in  the  Governor  alone.  This  was  not  done,  how- 
ever, without  much  debate,  not  so  much  over  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  Council  as  over  the  extent  of  the  Governor's 
veto  power.  Peter  R.  Livingston,  Erastus  Root,  and, 
others  urged  that  the  Legislature  should  be  empowered 
to  pass  a  bill  over  a  veto  by  a  simple  majority  vote.  It 
was,  they  argued,  undemocratic  to  permit  one  man  to 
overrule  the  majority  of  both  houses  of  the  Legislature; 
particularly  since  he  could  do  so  not  alone  because  he 
considered  a  bill  unconstitutional,  but  also  could  veto 
a  bill  simply  on  grounds  of  expediency,  or  because  he 
personally  did  not  like  it.  These  arguments  did  not 


1821]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  455 

prevail,  and  the  Governor  was  invested  with  the  veto 
power,  to  be  overriden  only  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of 
both  houses  of  the  Legislature. 

The  next  considerable  debate  was  over  the  length  of 
the  Governor's  term.  Earnest  arguments  were  made 
for  a  three  years'  term,  and  also  for  one  of  only  a  single 
year,  but  finally  a  term  of  two  years  was  decided  upon 
by  the  narrow  margin  of  61  votes  to  59. 

The  committee  on  the  Legislative  department 
recommended  that  the  State  be  divided  into  eight 
Senatorial  districts,  from  each  of  which  four  Senators 
should  be  elected;  that  no  member  of  either  house 
should  during  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected  be 
eligible  to  any  appointive  office;  that  no  person  holding 
any  office,  civil  or  military,  under  the  United  States 
government,  should  be  eligible  to  the  Legislature;  that 
all  persons  holding  constitutional  offices  "on  good 
behavior"  should  be  removable  only  by  a  two-thirds 
vote  of  both  houses;  and  that  the  capital  of  the  com- 
mon school  fund  should  always  remain  inviolate.  All 
these  recommendations  were  substantially  adopted. 

Over  the  question  of  the  elective  franchise  a  great 
debate  arose.  The  committee  recommended  practical 
abolition  of  the  property  qualification  by  extending  the 
franchise  to  all  white  men  who  had  lived  in  the  State 
six  months,  and  who  within  the  year  had  paid  taxes,  or 
worked  on  the  highways,  or  been  enrolled  in  the  militia. 
Peter  A.  Jay,  Abraham  Van  Vechten,  and  others  strove 
to  have  the  word  "white"  omitted,  so  as  to  enfranchise 
negroes,  but  were  opposed  by  Erastus  Root,  Samuel 
Young,  Ambrose  Spencer,  and  many  more.  Mr.  Van 


456  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Buren  did  not  speak  on  it,  but  voted  for  the  motion 
made  by  Mr.  Jay  for  the  striking  out  of  the  word 
"white,"  and  so  did  Mr.  Tompkins,  and  the  motion  was 
adopted  by  a  vote  of  63  to  59.  Later  this  action  was 
reversed,  and  the  colored  citizens  of  the  State  were  left 
without  the  right  to  vote. 

Chancellor  Kent  made  a  noteworthy  speech  urging 
the  retention  of  the  property  qualification  of  at  least 
$250  freehold  for  all  voters  for  State  Senators,  as  pro- 
posed by  Ambrose  Spencer,  in  which  he  said: 

"The  growth  of  the  city  of  New  York  is  enough  to 
startle  and  awaken  those  who  are  pursuing  the  ignis 
fatuus  of  universal  suffrage.  In  1773  it  had  21,000 
souls;  in  1801  it  had  60,000;  in  1806  it  had  76,000;  in 
1820  it  had  123,000.  It  is  rapidly  swelling  into  the 
unwieldly  population,  and  with  the  burdensome  pau- 
perism, of  a  European  metropolis.  New  York  is 
destined  to  become  the  future  London  of  America;  and 
in  less  than  a  century  that  city,  with  the  operation  of 
universal  suffrage  and  under  skillful  direction,  will 
govern  the  State." 

The  opposite  side  was  taken  strongly  by  Erastus  Root 
and  Martin  Van  Buren,  and  finally  prevailed  by  an 
overwhelming  majority. 

One  of  the  most  troublesome  questions  before  the 
convention  was  that  of  the  reform  of  the  judicial  sys- 
tem, discussion  of  it  being  protracted  and  acrimonious, 
largely  because  of  the  fact  that  thitherto  the  Chancellor 
and  Justices  had  often  been  active  partisan  politicians. 
Erastus  Root  and  others  wished  to  legislate  Chancellor 
Kent  and  the  five  Supreme  Court  Justices  out  of  official 


1821]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  457 

existence;  others  wished  to  retain  the  Chancellor  but 
get  rid  of  the  Justices;  and  still  others  wished  to  retain 
the  old  system  practically  unchanged.  Finally,  by  the 
narrow  majority  of  62  to  53  it  was  voted  to  recast  the 
judicial  system  by  creating  a  new  Supreme  Court  con- 
sisting of  a  Chief-Justice  and  two  Associate-Justices, 
and  by  dividing  the  State  into  not  fewer  than  four  nor 
more  than  eight  districts,  in  each  of  which  should  be 
a  District  Judge,  appointed  in  the  same  manner  and 
holding  office  by  the  same  tenure  as  the  Justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  possessing  the  powers  of  a  Justice 
of  the  Supreme  Court  in  chambers. 

Martin  Van  Buren  was  chairman  of  the  committee 
on  the  appointing  power,  and  he  reported  in  favor  of 
the  abolition  of  the  discredited  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment and  the  substitution  of  a  system  under  which 
militia  officers,  excepting  major-generals  and  the  Adju- 
tant-General, should  be  elected  by  persons  subject  to 
military  duty;  the  chief  State  officers,  such  as  Secretary 
of  State,  Comptroller,  etc.,  should  be  elected  as  United 
States  Senators  were,  by  the  Legislature  in  joint  session ; 
all  judicial  officers  (except  Justices  of  the  Peace,  who 
were  to  be  elected  by  the  people)  and  Sheriffs  should  be 
appointed  by  the  Governor  with  the  consent  of  the 
Senate;  Clerks  of  courts  should  be  appointed  by  the 
courts  which  they  were  to  serve;  and  no  judicial  officer 
should  be  removed  save  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  Senate 
on  recommendation  of  the  Governor,  for  expressed 
cause.  This  plan  was  adopted  after  long  debate,  with 
two  exceptions.  It  was  decided  to  have  Justices  of  th 


458  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1821 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Peace  appointed  by  the  Governor  from  lists  submitted 
by  the  County  Supervisors  and  Courts  of  Common 
Pleas,  and  to  have  Sheriffs  and  County  Clerks  elected 
by  the  people. 

After  these  and  other  questions  had  been  separately 
debated  and  settled,  the  convention  on  November  10, 
1821,  overwhelmingly  voted  to  adopt  the  revised  Con- 
stitution as  a  whole.  Only  eight  votes  were  recorded  in 
the  negative,  including  those  of  Peter  Augustus  Jay  and 
Abraham  Van  Vechten.  These  eight  were  irrecon- 
cilably opposed  to  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  and  to 
the  discrimination  against  colored  men.  They  and 
sixteen  others  declined  to  sign  the  instrument  after  it 
had  been  adopted.  The  convention  then  adopted  a 
brief  but  eloquent  address  to  the  people  of  the  State, 
drafted  by  Erastus  Root,  commending  the  revised  Con- 
stitution to  their  favorable  consideration.  It  then 
adjourned  without  day.  To  complete  the  record  it 
may  here  be  added  that  in  February,  1822,  the  revised 
Constitution  was  ratified  by  the  people  of  the  State  at 
a  special  election,  by  the  decisive  vote  of  74,732  ayes 
and  41,043  nays,  and  that  it  went  into  effect  on  Decem- 
ber 31,  1822. 

The  changes  thus  effected  in  the  State  government 
were  radical  and  sweeping,  and  must  be  considered  to 
have  been  all  for  the  better.  Perhaps  the  most  import- 
ant reform  of  all  was  the  abolition  of  the  Councils  of 
Appointment  and  of  Revision,  and  of  the  power  of  the 
Governor  to  prorogue  the  Legislature.  The  abolition 
of  the  property  qualification  for  white  voters  was 
another  important  advance  in  pure  democracy,  as  was 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  459 

also  the  considerable  extension  of  the  franchise.  A  note- 
worthy vindication  of  DeWitt  Clinton's  canal  policy 
was  seen  in  the  constitutional  recognition  of  the  canal 
system  of  the  State  and  the  creation  of  a  permanent 
Board  of  Canal  Commissioners,  to  be  a  department  of 
the  State  government.  The  date  of  the  State  elections 
was  also  changed  from  April  to  November,  and  the 
term  of  the  Governor  was  reduced  from  three  years  to 
two.  This  last-named  provision  shortened  DeWitt 
Clinton's  term,  making  it  end  on  January  1,  1823, 
instead  of  July  1,  1824. 

The  Forty-fifth  Legislature  assembled  at  Albany  on 
January  2,  1822,  still,  of  course,  under  the  old  Constitu- 
tion. The  Bucktails  were  in  control  of  the  Assembly, 
and  elected  Samuel  B.  Romaine,  of  New  York  City,  to 
be  Speaker.  The  Governor's  address  was  unusually 
long,  and  was  devoted  to  practical  topics  of  constructive 
legislation.  He  made  only  a  brief  reference  to  the  new 
Constitution,  expressing  no  opinion  as  to  its  merits,  for 
the  reason  that  it  was  then  being  considered  by  the 
people  of  the  State  in  advance  of  their  voting  upon  it, 
and  it  would  be  improper  for  him  to  do  anything  which 
might  influence  their  decision  upon  it.  He  dwelt  at 
some  length  upon  the  agricultural  interests  of  the  State, 
and  upon  the  desirability  of  providing  for  their  pro- 
ducts an  ampler  and  more  profitable  domestic  market, 
instead  of  looking  so  much  to  the  foreign  export  trade. 
This  was  to  be  effected  by  the  development  of  means 
of  coast  and  inland  transportation,  and  also  by  the  adop- 
tion of  a  protective  tariff  system  which  would  stimulate 


460  POLITICAL  AND   GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

American  manufacturing  industries  and  thus  increase 
the  demand  for  agricultural  products. 

He  gave,  naturally,  much  attention  to  the  canals  of 
the  State,  congratulating  the  Legislature  upon  the  prog- 
ress which  had  been  made  in  their  construction  and 
anticipating  the  completion  of  the  Erie  and  Champlain 
canals  during  the  year  1823.  He  called  attention  to  the 
canals  which  were  projected  in  the  new  States  of  Ohio 
and  Illinois,  and  recommended  that  the  influence  of 
New  York  in  Congress  should  be  exerted  in  the  direc- 
tion of  securing  national  aid  for  them.  He  also  recom- 
mended that  such  influence  should  be  given  toward 
persuading  the  national  government  to  enlarge  and 
beautify  the  capital  city  of  Washington.  Other  topics 
to  which  he  addressed  himself  were  the  public  schools, 
the  militia,  and  the  need  of  reform  in  criminal  juris- 
prudence. Finally,  assuming  this  to  be  the  last 
address  which  he  should  ever  make  before  the  Legisla- 
ture, he  said: 

"Whatever  diversity  of  opinion  may  exist,  I  am  per- 
suaded that  we  will  all  cooperate  with  a  sincere  and 
entire  devotion  to  our  solemn  and  momentous  duties, 
in  cherishing  a  spirit  of  conciliation  and  forbearance, 
and  in  cultivating  that  respect  which  we  owe  to  each 
other  and  to  ourselves." 

That  was  patriotic  counsel.  Unhappily,  it  did  not 
prevail.  The  bitterness  of  the  Bucktails  against  Clin- 
ton was  not  to  be  assuaged.  A  Bucktail  Assembly- 
man, Mr.  UlshoefTer,  immediately  moved  for  a  com- 
mittee to  consider  the  answering  of  the  Governor's 
speech,  and  was  of  course  himself  appointed  its  chair- 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  461 

man.  He  soon  presented  a  long  and  labored  report,  as 
unfavorable  as  possible  to  the  Governor,  and  particu- 
larly censuring  the  Governor  for  making  an  address  to 
the  Legislature  instead  of  sending  in  a  written  mes- 
sage. In  that  Clinton  was,  of  course,  only  following 
the  invariable  custom  of  his  predecessors  since  the 
organization  of  the  State.  It  had  also  been  the  custom 
of  the  President  of  the  United  States  thus  to  address 
Congress,  during  the  first  twelve  years  of  our  constitu- 
tional life.  Moreover,  DeWitt  Clinton  himself,  in  his 
first  address  to  the  Legislature,  had  referred  to  the 
subject,  had  explained  that  he  adhered  to  the  custom 
of  personal  address  merely  because  it  seemed  to  him  to 
be  more  respectful  to  the  Legislature  than  the  sending 
of  a  written  message  would  be,  and  had  assured  the 
Legislature  that  he  did  not  desire  or  expect  it  to  make 
any  formal  address  in  reply,  such  as  the  earlier  Legis- 
latures had  invariably  done. 

Mr.  Ulshoeffer's  attack  upon  the  Governor  was 
therefore  most  uncalled  for  and  can  be  attributed  to  no 
other  motive  than  personal  and  partisan  spite.  He 
concluded  his  report  with  the  moving  of  a  resolution, 
which  had  been  adopted  by  the  preceding  Assembly, 
denouncing  the  making  of  a  personal  speech  by  the 
Governor  and  the  returning  of  a  reply  by  the  Legisla- 
ture as  a  "remnant  of  royalty"  which  "ought  to  be 
abolished."  On  this  there  was  an  animated  debate,  in 
which  many  of  the  Bucktails  showed  that  they  were  not 
willing  to  go  so  far  in  hostility  to  the  Governor.  One 
of  the  few  Clintonians,  Mr.  McKown,  moved  as  a 
substitute  that  the  report  of  the  special  committee  be  not 


462  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

approved,  that  the  committee  be  dismissed  from  further 
consideration  of  the  subject,  and  that  the  old  custom 
of  formally  replying  to  the  Governor's  address,  which 
was  dropped  by  the  preceding  Legislature,  be  not 
restored.  This  substitute  motion  ultimately  prevailed, 
but  the  unpleasant  effect  of  Mr.  Ulshoeffer's  report 
and  motion  marred  the  remainder  of  the  session. 

Although  the  new  Constitution,  when  adopted  and 
made  effective,  would  abolish  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment, that  body  would  have  to  be  maintained  until  that 
reform  was  effected,  and  accordingly  on  January  10  the 
Assembly  proceeded  to  elect  the  last  such  Council  that 
was  ever  to  exist.  It  selected,  naturally,  four  Buck- 
tails,  or  at  least  opponents  of  the  Governor.  They  were 
John  Townsend,  of  the  Southern  district;  Charles  E. 
Dudley,  of  the  Middle;  Benjamin  Mooers,  of  the  East- 
ern; and  Perry  G.  Childs,  of  the  Western.  Mr. 
Mooers,  it  will  be  recalled,  had  been  elected  to  the 
Senate  as  a  Clintonian,  but  had  gone  over  to  the  Buck- 
tail  side,  and  had  been  the  Bucktail  candidate  for 
Lieutenant-Governor  on  the  ticket  with  ex-Governor 
Tompkins  against  Clinton.  This  Council  had  very 
little  to  do,  since  all  the  offices  were  already  filled  with 
Bucktails  or  anti-Clintonians,  and  there  was  no  occa- 
sion to  remove  any  of  them. 

Several  important  acts  were  passed  by  this  Legisla- 
ture in  anticipation  of  the  new  Constitution.  Assembly- 
men were  apportioned  among  the  counties,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  whole  number  provided  for  in  the  new 
Constitution.  Another  measure  relieved  the  State  of 
all  responsibility  for  the  lotteries  which  had  been 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  463 

established  for  the  benefit  of  Union  College  and  other 
worthy  institutions,  and  turned  over  to  the  managers  of 
those  institutions  the  task  of  directing  them.  There- 
upon, under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  Eliphalet  Nott,  of 
Union  College,  an  arrangement  was  made  with  Archi- 
bald Mclntyre,  the  former  State  Comptroller,  and  John 
B.  Yates,  to  be  the  managers  of  all  lotteries  conducted 
for  the  benefit  of  those  institutions.  The  Legislature 
adjourned  without  day  on  April  17. 

Under  the  provisions  of  the  new  Constitution  the 
April  elections  were  now  abolished.  None  were  held 
in  1822,  the  contest  at  the  polls  being  deferred  until  the 
Tuesday  after  the  first  Monday  in  November.  Accord- 
ingly the  Legislative  caucus  for  the  selection  of  candi- 
dates for  Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor  was  held 
at  a  much  later  date  than  usual.  The  only  caucus  held 
was  that  of  the  Bucktails,  who  by  this  time  were  of  so 
overwhelming  strength  that  any  opposition  to  them 
seemed  futile.  There  were  numerous  candidates  for 
the  Governorship,  inspired  and  encouraged  by  the 
practical  certainty  that  whoever  was  named  by  the 
Bucktails  would  be  elected,  and,  of  course,  that  under 
the  new  Constitution  the  Governor  would  possess  far 
greater  power  than  ever  before,  particularly  over 
appointments  to  office.  Indeed,  never  before  in  the 
history  of  the  State  had  there  been  so  many  aspirants 
or  so  much  wirepulling,  intriguing,  and  maneuvering 
to  control  the  nominating  caucus. 

It  is  an  interesting  illustration  of  a  certain  phase 
of  political  obsession  that  Daniel  D.  To'mpkins  was 
willing  to  accept  the  nomination,  although  his  election 


464  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

would  have  necessitated  his  resignation  of  the  office  of 
Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  upon  his  second 
term  in  which  he  had  entered  a  year  before.  This  was 
partly,  perhaps,  because  to  his  ardent  and  active  disposi- 
tion the  strenuous  life  of  a  Governor  appealed  more 
strongly  and  congenially  than  the  comparative  calm 
and  political  neutrality  of  the  president  of  the  Senate. 
Doubtless,  however,  he  desired  the  "vindication"  which 
he  imagined  such  election  would  give  him,  on  account 
both  of  the  controversy  over  his  accounts  with  the  State 
and  also  of  his  defeat  by  Clinton  at  the  last  election ; 
though  to  the  impartial  and  detached  historian  any  such 
"vindication"  seems  entirely  superfluous. 

Another  candidate  was  Erastus  Root,  who  in  bril- 
liancy of  intellect,  sincerity  of  patriotism,  and  purity  of 
character  was  the  peer  of  any  contemporary,  and  whose 
great  services  to  the  State  gave  him  abundant  title  to 
recognition  and  preferment.  Nathan  Sanford,  one  of 
the  foremost  jurists  of  the  time,  was  another  candidate. 
So  was  Peter  B.  Porter,  a  man  of  commanding  worth. 
So  was  Henry  Seymour,  who  had  distinguished  him- 
self in  important  public  works.  None  of  these  were, 
however,  regarded  with  favor  by  the  coterie  of  men 
who  were  dictating  and  with  iron  hand  controlling  the 
policy  of  the  party.  Only  two  candidates  were 
seriously  considered,  and  between  them  the  party  rulers 
were  not  long  in  making  a  decision.  These  were 
Colonel  Samuel  Young,  and  Justice  Joseph  C.  Yates, 
of  the  Supreme  Court.  The  former,  of  whom  we  have 
already  heard  in  these  pages,  was  an  able  lawyer,  a 
powerful  orator,  and  an  experienced  legislator  and 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  46b 

administrator.  He  was  also  a  master  of  political 
tactics,  though  his  extreme  radicalism  and  his  intoler- 
ance toward  all  who  disagreed  with  him  alienated  many 
who  otherwise  would  have  been  his  enthusiastic  sup- 
porters. Justice  Yates  had  been  considered  by  the 
leaders  as  a  candidate  in  1820,  but  had  prudently 
declined  to  enter  the  contest  against  Clinton.  He  was 
a  modest,  cautious  man,  of  exceptional  personal  charm 
and  irreproachable  character,  though  of  mediocre 
ability  and  passive  rather  than  aggressive  disposition. 
He  was  well  fitted  by  temperament  to  be  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  but  not  well  fitted  to  be  Governor. 

There  was  no  question  that  the  majority  of  the  Buck- 
tail  party  and  also  a  majority  of  its  influential  leaders 
would  have  preferred  Colonel  Young.  But  majorities 
did  not  count.  The  party  was  controlled  by  an  oli- 
garchy at  the  State  capital — of  which  we  shall  hear 
much  more  hereafter, — and  that  body  decided  upon 
Justice  Yates  as  the  most  "available"  candidate.  That 
meant,  so  far  as  the  electoral  campaign  was  concerned, 
that  he  would  be  the  easiest  of  all  candidates  to  elect, 
since  he  had  no  enemies  and  since  Chief-Justice  Spencer 
and  most  of  the  Clintonian  leaders  were  quite  ready 
to  support  him.  Indeed,  since  it  was  a  foregone  con- 
clusion that  Clinton  would  not  seek  reelection,  Yates 
was  practically  the  Clintonian  candidate.  It  was  good 
policy  to  nominate  him,  therefore,  partly  in  order  to 
avoid  Clintonian  opposition,  and  partly  in  order  thus  to 
reunite  the  Democratic  party.  So  far  as  the  prospec- 
tive administration  was  concerned,  it  meant  that  as 
Governor  Mr.  Yates  would  be  more  readily  compliant 


466  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

with  the  wishes  of  the  party  "bosses"  than  the 
immeasurably  more  independent  and  aggressive  Colo- 
nel Young.  One  of  the  foremost  promoters  of  Justice 
Yates's  candidacy  was  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  a  distant 
relative,  whose  place  as  Secretary  of  State  at  Albany, 
whose  engaging  personality,  and  whose  political 
acumen  and  industry  gave  him  great  influence. 

The  outcome  of  the  Legislative  caucus  was  that  Mr. 
Yates  was  nominated  for  Governor  by  a  decisive 
majority  over  Colonel  Young.  This  was  satisfactory 
to  the  party  generally,  but  it  was  a  bitter  disappoint- 
ment to  Colonel  Young.  True,  he  affected  to  regard 
it  lightly,  saying  in  a  jocose  maner  that  if  the  State  could 
get  along  without  him  he  would  try  to  get  along  with- 
out the  State.  Also,  he  offered  Justice  Yates  his  con- 
gratulations. But  beneath  the  surface  the  defeat 
rankled,  and  thereafter  he  neglected  no  opportunity  to 
intrigue  against  his  victorious  rival,  and  it  was  in  no 
small  measure  through  his  enmity,  all  the  more  deadly 
because  partly  concealed,  that  Governor  Yates's  admin- 
istration ended  in  political  failure.  The  caucus  with- 
out contest  nominated  Erastus  Root  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor. 

It  was  an  anomaly  that  DeWitt  Clinton  was  denied 
renomination  and  election.  He  had  shown  himself  one 
of  the  ablest  constructive  statesmen  that  had  ever 
occupied  the  Governorship,  and  his  great  canal 
scheme,  the  greatest  public  work  ever  undertaken  by 
New  York,  was  approaching  successful  completion 
amid  the  universal  plaudits  of  even  those  who  had  for- 
merly most  bitterly  opposed  it.  Yet  political  influences 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  467 

against  him  were  so  strong  that  his  friends  realized  that 
his  reelection  would  be  impossible,  and  they  so  advised 
him  early  in  the  year.  He  did  not  take  kindly  to  the 
prospect  of  being  shelved.  His  strong  impulse  was  to 
defy  the  hostile  leaders,  ignore  the  advice  of  friends, 
and  enter  the  campaign  with  all  his  old  audacity.  But 
in  the  end  he  yielded,  persuaded  that  candidacy  would 
surely  end  in  humiliating  defeat.  In  order  to  "let  him 
down  easily,"  several  of  his  chief  political  lieutenants 
adopted  resolutions  appropriately  laudatory  of  his 
public  services  and  appointed  a  committee  to  inquire 
his  wishes  concerning  a  renomination.  To  that  inquiry 
he  replied  that  he  had  decided  not  to  let  his  name  be 
used  as  that  of  a  candidate.  Thereupon  his  friends, 
and  all  who  were  left  of  the  disintegrating  Clintonian 
party,  determined  to  put  no  candidate  into  the  field,  but 
rather  to  favor  the  nomination  of  Justice  Yates  by  the 
Bucktails. 

The  reasons  for  this  elimination  of  Clinton,  after  five 
years  of  singularly  efficient  service,  are  not  difficult  to 
discern.  He  was  a  competent  statesman,  but  a  poor 
politician.  He  was  deficient  in  tact,  in  tolerance,  in  the 
spirit  of  accomodation,  in  that  indefinable  quality 
known  as  "personal  magnetism."  He  was  cold,  arro- 
gant, dictatorial,  animated  by  the  spirit  of  "rule  or 
ruin."  He  was  a  great  head  of  the  State.  He  was  no 
leader  of  a  party.  However,  he  was  an  indomitable 
philosopher,  and  in  the  very  hour  of  his  rejection  he 
meditated  upon  a  future  recouping  of  his  fortunes. 
At  the  height  of  the  campaign  he  predicted  that  the 


468  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

old  party  lines  would  thereafter  be  broken,  the  old  party 
names  would  vanish,  the  Legislative  caucus  system  for 
making  nominations  would  be  abandoned,  and  that 
Yates,  Van  Buren,  and  their  associates  would  in  time 
"go  down  like  the  stick  of  a  rocket."  How  completely 
that  prophecy  was  fulfilled  in  the  course  of  only  a 
couple  of  years,  we  shall  hereafter  see. 

Justice  Yates  was  not,  however,  to  be  without  a  com- 
petitor. The  Clintonians  named  no  candidate,  and  the 
Federalists  named  none.  But  Solomon  Southwick 
named  himself.  That  erratic  genius,  one  of  the  most 
gifted  and  most  fantastic  men  of  his  time,  had  had 
a  brilliant  and  influential  career  as  a  journalist,  as  the 
editor  successively  of  the  Albany  Register,  the  Plough- 
boy,  and  the  Christian  Visitant.  He  had  for  years  been 
Clerk  of  the  Assembly.  He  had  been  Sheriff,  State 
Printer,  and  postmaster  at  Albany.  But  he  had  been 
tried  for  bribery  and  removed  from  the  office  of  State 
Printer,  and  dismissed  from  the  postmastership  for 
defalcation.  Various  real  estate  speculations  and  other 
enterprises  had  proved  unprofitable,  and  he  had  become 
practically  penniless.  In  such  circumstances  he  con- 
ceived the  extravagant  notion  of  putting  himself  for- 
ward for  the  Governorship  of  the  State.  He  secured 
as  his  chief  campaign  worker  Thurlow  Weed,  then  a 
bright  young  journalist  at  Manlius  but  destined  to 
become  one  of  the  foremost  political  leaders  of  the 
State,  and  got  him  to  canvass  the  western  part  of  the 
State  in  his  behalf.  But  Weed  soon  recognized  the 
madness  of  the  undertaking.  "He  was  insanely  anxious 


1822]  A  NEW  CONSTITUTION  469 

to  become  Governor,  and  all  the  more  insane  because 
of  its  impossibility,"  said  Weed,  long  afterward.  "He 
had  been  editing  with  great  industry  and  ability  the 
Ploughboy  and  the  Christian  Visitant,  and  beguiled 
himself  with  a  confident  belief  that  farmers  and  Chris- 
tians, irrespective  of  party,  would  sustain  him.  .  .  . 
Years  afterward  I  learned  that  in  politics,  as  in  almost 
everything  else,  Mr.  Southwick  was  blinded  by  his 
enthusiasm  and  credulity." 

True,  there  were  those  who  believed  that  Southwick 
would  win.  Even  DeWitt  Clinton — mirabile  dictu! — 
was  among  them.  Only  a  few  weeks  before  the  elec- 
tion he  spoke  confidently  of  the  impending  defeat  of 
Yates.  The  outcome  was,  however,  that  Yates  was 
elected  by  a  more  nearly  unanimous  vote  than  any  other 
ever  cast  for  Governor  of  New  York.  He  received 
128,493  votes,  to  Southwick's  2,910.  At  the  same  time 
the  Bucktails  elected  every  member  of  the  State  Senate, 
and  nearly  nine-tenths  of  the  Assembly. 

In  such  fashion  was  the  first  great  era  in  the  poli- 
tical history  of  New  York  ended.  For  forty-six  years 
it  had  been  under  its  first  Constitution,  and  its  politics 
had  been  marked  with  the  divisions  and  rivalries  first 
of  Federalists  and  Anti-Federalists,  and  then  of  the 
Federalists,  the  Democratic-Republican  party,  and  the 
various  factional  elements  of  the  latter  organization. 
Now  a  new  Constitution  was  to  prevail,  together  with  a 
new  alignment  of  parties  and  new  party  nomenclature. 
Anti-Federalists,  Republicans,  Martling's  Men,  Buck- 
tails,  and  what  not  were  to  be  known  simply  as  Demo- 


470  POLITICAL  AND  GOVERNMENTAL  [1822 

HISTORY  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

crats,  and  in  opposition  to  them  was  to  arise  from  the 
ruins  of  Federalism  the  great  Whig  party.  A  new  era 
had  dawned  in  New  York  government  and  politics, 
though  it  was  still  to  be  dominated  for  a  time  by  the  old 
leaders. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


1  6 

OCT  3u  136? 


•••-"•• 

ID-URL 

1973 

REC'D  LD-URl 


JWU7B 


DEC  3  11980 


Form  L9-50m-4,'61(B8994s4)444 


3   1158  00652  9613 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


338  381    5 


